ABSTRACT of THESIS on 'CICERO AS A TRANSLATOR' ...... I I ' ■ " I I I ^ — — — 111 111.... I ■ ■ ■ "P Examination of Cicero*s verse translations from Homer, the Greek ^ dramatists and Aratus, and of his prose translations from Plato, Xenophon and the Stoic and Ep4our§&ft philosophers, show the following characteristics of Cicero as a translator:- j As a rule he translates clearly and accurately. He omits what is irrelevant or superfluous if by so doing he can make the sense clearer ' ■;] he adds such explanations as will elucidate the Greek writer's meaning for j a Roman reader, e.g. his translation of the names of constellations. But I his method of translation varies according to his purpose in translating, àI Sometimes he gives only the main thought of the passage and omits all details, e.g. short passages translated from Homer and Plato. Sometimes his translation is free and he alters the tone of his original, e.g. two longer passages from Homer, and his version of Aratus' Phenomena. In / t Phenomena he adds many words connoting light. In his prose translations 1 . ' V the most striking change is his use of two Latin words for one Greek"word. His use of the dactylic hexameter for his translation of the Phenomena is much more varied than Aratus' and shows development when compared with the Latin hexameters of Ennius. Cicero's hexameters are smoother, and lighter and more varied than Ennius', and contain fewer archaisms. Some passages are almost equal to the versification of Virgil. Cicero, compared with earlier Roman translators from the Greek, seldom ■* r _ ■■ I j, uses compound Latin epithets coined on the analogy with the Greek. 1 Cicero created a philosophical language. He coined few words, bût combined common words. He was consistent in his use of philosophical terms and careful in the framing of definitions.

CICERO AS A TR.WSLATOR.

Summary of Chapters.

I. Cicero as a Translator. The character of his translation varies accord­ ing to the original Greek and his object in trans­ lating it - lost translations - extant verse trans­ lations to be discussed*

II. Cicero's Translations from Homer* Tke short passages - the Sirens' invitation to Odysseus - Calchas' interpretation of the omen of the snake and the sparrows - Cicero as a translator of Homer.

III. Cicero's Translations from the Greek Dramatists. The authorship of these passages - the passage translated from Sophocles' Trachiniae - translations from Euripides.

IV. Earlier Poets as Translators from the Greek. Early Latin literature owed much to translations Livius Andronicus - Naevius and Pacuvius compared v/ith/ ProQuest Number: 10097154

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. uest.

ProQuest 10097154

Published by ProQuest LLC(2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 with Cicero as inventors of compound epithets - Ennius' translation of the Medea - comparison of Ennius with Cicero.

V. Cicero's translations from Aratus. The 'Phenomena' is Cicero’s earliest transla­ tion - it was written as a literary exercise - Cicero usually literal - the didactic element - intricate passages translated More freely - obscure passages simplified - words and passages omitted by Cicero because (l) otiose or (2) confusing or (3) epithets inapplicable to stars - passages elaborated by Cicero with the object of explaining or adorning the original - Greek names explained - Greek naraes translated - Latin names substituted - digression on Cicero's etymology - other explanations added by Cicero - Greek legends explained - elaboration for poetic effect including the addition of epithets and of words connoting light - av/e-inspiring element ig­ nored by Cicero - passages concerning mankind - passages misinterpreted by Cicero - estimation of Cicero's translation of the Phenomena - his trans­ lation of the Prognostica - this less literal and more beautiful than his translation of the Phenomena comparison/ comparison with Virgil's translations.

VI. Cicero's Use of the Dactylic Hexameter. iHis metre comparatively new to Latin liter­ ature - Cicero familiar with the hexameters of Homer and Ennius - characteristics of Ennius* verse - the extent to which they are found in Cicero - comparison of Cicero, Ennius and Virgil with regard to the sim­ ultaneous ending of clause and verse, elision of s, polysyllabic verse ending, proportion of dactyls and spondees, variety of rhythm.

VII. Cicero's Translations from Plato's Tlmaeus. His object in translating the Timaeus - his version is usually very accurate - his aim is to make the argument clear and he therefore (l) omits minor points (2) occasionally sacrifices elegance to clear­ ness (3) introduces Greek words (4) adds explanatory phrases - occasional misinterpretation - omission of words apparently not understood - Cicero is con­ sistent in the use of special terms - instances of one Greek word translated variously - Cicero's use of pairs of synonyms - his translation of similes and metaphors - estimation of his translation as a whole. 4.

VIII. Cicero's Prose Translations (other than the Timaeus). The authors from whom Cicero translates - often only the important points translated and details omitted or generalised - translation of the story of Gyges - translation of an anecdote from Xenophon - translation of a typical passage f rom Plato - trans­ lation of familiar Greek terms by corresponding Latin equivalents - translations of Epicurean and Stoic definitions.

IX. Cicero as thé Creator of a philosophie language. Cicero was the first Roman to write on philo­ sophical subjects - his assertion that Latin is as rich a language as Greek - his caution in coining new words - he created a new language by (l) combining old words into new phrases (2) giving new meanings to old words (3) coining new words - his consistent use of philosophical terms.

X. Conclusion. Summary of the characteristics of Cicero's translations with regard to general tone, language and metre - the difficulty of translating - Cicero was translating from a familiar language into his

native tongue. NOTE. I have generally employed the following texts: The Teubner text of Cicero's works. Archer-Hind*a edition of Plato's Timaeus. G. R. Mair's edition of Aratus' Phenomena.. (Loeb Classics) The Oxford Classics (Greek). CH.APTSR I.

Cicero as a Translator*

Marcus Tullius Cicero reveals himself through his writings in many different diaracters* We can see him as an orator, a poet, a statesman, a philosopher, or a personal friend* I have made it my object to seentiat he was like in yet another capacity, that of a trans­ lator of Greek literature. Even as a translator his character varies. For he translates at one time into verse and at another Into prose, and his object in translating is not always the same. He translates from Homer and the Greek dramatists to illustrate philosophical theories. He translates Aratus as a literary exercise* He translates Plato's Timaeus in order that the Romans may have a Latin version of the dialogue. It is important to bear this in mind in judging him as a translator. We shall expect him to be most literal when he is translating the Timaeus; and we shall not be surprised if we find that he does not translate Homer as an epic poet, or Aratus as an Alexandrine peat, whose faults must be reproduced as well as his virtues.

If

- m a 2. If the young poet, Cicero, can improve on his exemplar, Aratus, we shall find that he will do so. It is most unfortunate that none of Cicero's trans­ lations from the Greek orators has survived. He trans­ lated, among ither speeches, Demosthenes on the Grown, but only his comment on the translation remains to tan­ talise us. "Non converti ut interpres sed ut orator, etc." (de Opt.gen. orat c3)• I propose to begin with his verse translations from the Greek poets; taking, firstly, the passages from Homer; then, those from the dramatists; and lastly, his version of Aratus' Phenomena, which is the longest of his verse translations and the one wherein he attains the greatest measure of success as a poet. CHAPTER II.

Cicero's Translations from Homer.

Cicero's extant translations from Homer consist of seven short passages {one to three linesand two longer ones. The translations are all embodied in his other writings where they are used as Illustrations; and it is not surprising to find that^while the point is brought out clearly in the translation^the rest of the quotation is often less faithfully rendered. For example, Cicero translates Iliad IX 646:-

yUo! OTrîTûTt YW V /lpVjl/0/G-|V T w ’ V-^

In/ 4.

In the following passage Cicero's translation so far compresses the original as to leave the main point less forceful than it is in Homer. Hector challenges an Achaian to single combat and promises that if he slays the Achaian the Achaian shall be buried on the seashore where seafarers will pass and say:- (II: VII 89)

o v TToT 0l|O f cr-Tt uo TcL KoCT ^ ^ I (p s 5 which Cicero translates:- (de Gloria II l) Hie situs est vitae iam pridera lamina linquens Qui quohdam Hectoreo perculsus concidit ense.

He omits to translate o ( ^ owS^os all of which emphasize the heroic nature of the combat on which the defeated warrior's glory will depend* In one passage Cicero makes explicit what is only implied in the Greek. He translates (II: IX 236)

l i l s Ct < ^ t

Ki-^y 'rro\^oi' K cli zirvTptyuo/ tt^ v T ol. / / ^ y / / rrf'rrTouiri V ‘ iro rt T is i rrovoto

/p->j T j V y k i / H^cjk^àL ^/o/ToL^ ^ Vr"* f / The only word which he omits to translate is ‘Z'n'yjTfoly^or which is entirely redundant. The following couplet is almost as literal. The Greek (II: VI 201..) is:-

1~Ù( o 'îTiS'fov To OIOS cL^Zt -o oV Ô^oyr /<0(.T(.9wi7 ir^ -T ô V ir^^i^TTcjv and Cicero translates it (Tusc: III §63) Qui miser in campis maerens errabat /^leis Ipse suura cor edens hominum vestigia vitans. ? Cicero does not actually translate 0 1 0 % and the ending of his first line is not so impressive as the Greek; but by adding 'miser* at the beginning^and coup­ ling 'maerens' with 'errabat'^he gives the same emphasis to the loneliness of Bellerophon. We come now to the longer passages which appealed to Cicero as attractive subjects for translation: "ut nos otiosi convertimus" as he says of one of them. They were/ 6.

were not, it appears, translated primarily as illustra­ tions of a point which Cicero wished to discuss. The passage from the Odyssey (Od. XII 184) deals with the Sirens' invitation to Odysseus. Cicero's ver­ sion is, on the whole, very literal. But in that passage of the de Finihus in which this translation occurs he explains what he believes to be the significance of the story - to wit that Odysseus was desirous of hearing the Sirens, not out of curiosity or love of melody, but from a wish for knowledge. (de Fin: V §49)• 'Mihi qui- dem Romerus huiusmodi quiddam vidisse videtur in iis quae de Sirenum cantibus finxerit. Neque enim vocum auavitate videntur aut novitate quadam et varietate cantandi revocare eos solitae, qui praetervehebantur, sed quia multa se scire profitebantur ..... Vidit Homerus probari fabulam non posse si cantiunculis tantus irretitus vir teneretur; scientiam pollicentur quam non erat mi rum sapimtiae cup i do patria esse cariorem. * ÿhere, I think, (and I find that Lange holds the same view), Cicero is attributing to Homer philosophical theories which are not to be found in this passage of the Odyssey. But, in order to make clear his own interpretation of c ' ^ the Greek Cicero renders ryby 'variis avido satiatus pectore musis'. 'Musis' means more than

beautiful/ 7. beautiful songs. It means the different branches of knowledge whereby a man becomes 'doctior*. For the rest, it is to be noted that Cicero omits or changes certain epithets. irokuon^r Kv^os is translated *Odecus Argolicum^Ulixes*, and Y^-ovi

7 f is translated 'terris latis' - that is, Cicero employs a common Latin epithet of earth to replace a common Greek one which would\be cumbrous and over-emphatic if translated literally. / By rendering 77eC|0-i^\,t(rt ^ 'haec est transvectus caerula* Cicero dispenses with the need for and therefore omits it. An interesting point arises over Cicero's translation of oc\\ o y

Interpreting the phenomenon la concerned with numbers only. (II: II 326).

WS owTas, K.oL-ri tcpotyt

> f > \ /

Cos yct

Cicero, then, having little sympathy with sparrows, regards them primarily as omens', and because he con­ siders Calchas' interpretation of these omens as absurd, emphasizes not so much the significance of the number of birds as the inference to be drawn from the cruelty of the snake. (de Div: II 29) 'Nam quot avis taetro mactatas dente videtis Tot nos ad Troiam belli exanclabimus annos.' The first part of the translation of this passage is at least as lively as the Greek. For the blunt

_ Irzo'y K^k)(yLS yUo.y-rzu'z7-^/^ -yi ol K f

Cicero says, in more reflective mood:- "Auguris ut nostri Calchantis fata quearaüs Scire ratosne habeant an vanos pectoris orsus." In his description of the preparations for sacri­ fice he uses vivid and striking Latin words for the vaguer and more ordinary Greek ones. (II. II 30$) (3o,y^ous

'L S o ^ Z v TtX-vjCcrc-.,.^^ 10.

He says:-

Nos circum latices gelidos fumantibus aris Aurlgeris divom plaçantes numina tauris Sub platano umbrifera, fons unde emanat aquaï ... becomes latices gelidos: becomes fumantibus aris; ^KcLfo^^cf^s becomes aurigeris tauris and ^< istic of Homer's snake is its colour Vcoru. ^^(^oiyrds> ^ but with Cicero's it is size. "Vidimus inmani specie tortuque draconem". Next follows the description of the sparrows and their fate. Cicero's version is disappointing because of his comparatively unsympathetic treatment, an ex­ planation of which has already been suggested. The Greek is (II: II 3H) t f / ZvèjL l't < r ^ y

Cicero/ 11.

Cicero translates:- Qui platani in ramo foliorum teginlne saeptos Corripuit pullos; quos curn consumeret oeto Nona super treinulo genetrix clangors volabat; Cui feruB inmani Ianlavit viscera morsu. Here are the plain facts set out coldly and clearly without repetition and without pity. These are the data submitted to Calchas by Zeus, and he does not fail to draw the correct conclusion. But minds of a less legal castw than Cicero's feel that somehow his translation is inadequate. To begin with, Cicero never tells us

. f that the birds are sparrov;s. He translates ctt^ ou Q-tn o

/ / \/y^7ricL by one word 'pulli' - a word which does not even denote exclusively young birds. (In de Natura Deorum II §124 when Cicero wishes to speak of young birds he finds it necessary to say 'ex ovis pul11 orti*.) Up to this point the only indication that he has given of their being birds is that they are in the branch of a plane tree; later he adds that the mother is flying, and finally describes them as 'teneros volu­ cres ' . But the Greek makes it clear from the beginning y( ^ and does not let us forget it ^y&oL S ccrdx/ (hy to v

In the next line they are cowering in fear, and at 1.314 they are cheeping pitifully f y , In Homer the mother bird's concern for her nestlings is 1 vividly/ 12. vividly described dj^c^^iroTcL'ro /x..

Cicero's rendering might equally well mean that her fear is for herself. super tremulo genetrix clangore volabat. The description of the snake killing the mother bird id completely changed by Cicero. Presumably he judges that the ferocity of the snake is more impressive and more worth emphasizing than the fact that the bird was seized by the wing as she circled over the nest shriek­ ing. But he sacrifices the vividness of the picture. His line cui ferus inmani laniavit viscera morau might apply to any animal preying upon any other animal. And is 'Ianiare' appropriate to a snake? Does it rend its victim? - or does it devour it whole, kolt as Homer says? In the last few lines there are three examples of stereotyped epithets which are not translated by Cicero.

For ^ he has simply

Achivi; k^ o\t&u -^ / iw becomes Saturnius genitor; and for he has 'ipse creator*. After examining these passages one must conclude, I think, that Cicero is not a great translator of Homer.

He/ 13-

He translates too much for his own ends to represent adequately the spirit of his original. In one or two passages, such as the couplet describing the loneliness of Bellerophon, he is successful because the lines con­ tain nothing irrelevant to his purpose. But in passages where he omits all but the essential point he is ob­ viously not translating Homer as an epic poet. So too, in the passages dealing with the Sirens* song and Cal­ chas * prophecy he changes the whole atmosphere; in the former passage by making the Sirens appeal to Odysseus as philosopher and not as a lover of melody, and in the latter passage by describing the ferocity of the snake instead of the bird's distress. If we consider his diction we see that by omitting patronymics and faiailiar epithets he ignores an import­ ant characteristic of the Greek epic. The fact that Latin does not generally admit of compound epithets and that Cicero is following his predecessors in ignoring them in translating may excuse, but does not justify him as a translator. Where the diction of the Greek is simple^Cicero does not hesitate to elaborate. He trans- latas Try' (H: II I.305) by "latices gelidos". Since his rendering of the whole passage is unusually free he may perhaps be justified

in/ 14.

In using a mor§ artificial ÿ h rtih û î but a faithful trans­ lator would have been content to use simple language with , Homer. I have mentioned elsewhere Cicero's practice of substituting for a vugue word a norc explicit one, as / c / "aurigeris tauris" for . It is Justifiable if tiie translator really beliovea that this was what his author meant, and that he la not improving on his original but only Interpreting it. This was probably

Cicero's view In translating Ti-K^ by •aurigeris tauris** but its appear?xnce In the same sentence as •latices gelidos" and •fu.'^antlbuo aria" gives some cause for doubt. /tr

CHAPTER III.

Cicero's Translations from the Greek Dramatists.

Let us turn nov/ to Cicero's translations from the Greek dramatists. Before considering them in detail, it is necessary to decide an important question - whetiler they really are Cicero's own translations. For there are some grounds for the suggestion that Cicero is not the author of the translations from Aeschylus and Sophocles^but that when Cicero introduces them he is only quoting translations by the dramatist, Attius. This question has been discussed carefully by Paguet, in his treatise "de Poetica M. Tullii Ciceronis Facultate," and most of his arguments in favour of Cicero's author­ ship are, I think, convincing. Cicero himself makes the matter almost certain from his manner of introducing the verses, and the question would never have arisen if Priscian and other grammarians had not ascribed certain lines from them to Attius. I shall say nothing about the translations from Aeschylus: one is very short and calls for no comment, and the other cannot be coirpared with its original as the/ 16.

the Greek has perished. But the question of their authorship is important. If there is good reason for believing that Cicero translated the passages from Aeschylus, this strengthens the probability that he also translated the passage from Sophocles. His authorship of the translations from Aeschylus has been doubted for two reasons. Firstly, because Nonius ascribes to a play called "Prometheus" written by Attius the lines: "Turn sublime avolans Pinnata cauda nostrum adulat sanguinem." Secondly, because the original of this passage does not occur in the extant "Prometheus Bound" of Aeschylus. But these two arguments are rendered valueless because the grammarian Arusianus Messus ascribes the same lines beginning "Turn sublime. . ."to Cicero; and as Aeschylus wrote three plays about Prometheus, there is no reason why this passage should not have come from one of the two lost members of the trilogy. > Moreover, Cicero openly ascribes to Ennius or to Attius many verses which he quotes. For example, he says in one place (Tusculans II, § 13); "Nam ut agri non oranes frugiferi sunt qui coluntur falsumque illud Attil Probae etsi . . ." and/ 17.

and (Tusc: III, | 61): "Hlnc llle Agamemno Homer 1 eus et idem Attianus Sciridens dolore ..." and in the same chapter: ^ "ut ilia apud Ennium nutrix '^Cupido cepit ..." Compare also Book IV, Ch. VII, XI, XXXI, XXXIII. It is unlikely that he would acknowledge the authorship of some quotations but not of others. Where, therefore, he gives only the author of the Greek original, it is reasonable to suppose that he translated them himself. In one passage (Tusc: III, I 29) he actually introduces a quotation with the words: "Itaque apud Euripidem a Theseo dicta laudantur licet enim ut saepe facimus in Latinum ilia con- vertere." Nor does Priscian hesitate to speak of Cicero's trans­ lations from Euripides. If these are accepted as authentic it seems absurd to question the fragments from Aeschylus and Sophocles which are ascribed by Cicero to their Greek authors only. Further evidence is deduced from Cicero's conver­ sation with his pupil in Tusc: II, Ch.11. The pupil asks who is the author of the verses just quoted: now it is unlikely that he v/ould be ignorant of the verses of Ennius and Attius, seeing that he is supposed to be a/ 18. a well-educated youth. Moreover, Cicero says in his reply: "... studiose equidem utor nostris poetis; sed sicubi illi defecerunt verti etiam multa de Graecis ne quo ornamento in hoc genere dis­ putation's careret Latina oratio." The evidence seems overwhelmingjbut it is worth noticing one or two points which especially concern the authorship of the translation from Sophocles. It has been suspected as Attius* work for two reasons. Firstly, because the French scholar, Scaliger, suggested that Attius wrote a play called the "Trachiniae"; and, second­ ly, because Nonius omits this passage in quoting two in­ stances of Cicero*s use of the word ’exanclare’. On the other hand, Charisius ascribes to Cicero the line "jam decolorem sanguinem omnem exsorbuit;" and a careful comparison of this passage with the extant fragments of Attius ^ plays makes it difficult to suppose that it could have been written by Attius. Though among Cicero's translations we have only one passage from Sophocles, and there is no mention of any others, the admiration which Cicero expresses for Sopho­ cles would suggest that this may not be his only attempt to translate his poetry. He says (de Div: I, 54) "adjungamus doctissimum hominum, poetam quld^ divinum, Sophoclem. " Clavel/ 19,

Clavel and Lange both hold the view that of the three tragedians Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides, Sophocles was Cicero's favourite, despite the fact that he trans­ lates nine passages from Euripides and only this one (so far as we can be certain) from Sophocles. But, as Lange points out, Cicero never quotes for the salce of the poetry alone, and the philosophical maxims of Euripides were more useful to him than Sophocles' poetry as illustrations of his philosophical writings and oratory. Clavel considers that this passage from Sophocles is Cicero's highest poetic attainment, (Tusc: II, § 20., Soph: Trach: 1046). It is intensely dramatic and is quoted by Cicero to show how even Hercules was unable to ignore physical suffering and to bear it silently. His translation is vigorous and follows the original closely^except in one or two passages which are severely curtailed. The text of the original Greek is very corrupt;which makes it difficult to criticise the accuracy of a translation which is probably nearer to its origi­ nal than it appears to be when compared with modern texts of Sophocles. In the first two lines Jebb reads;

Z ÏÏo \\X Kd.'/ Koo \dyw

Kcl'i v Z - a i v - i "Lyw . which Cicero translates: 0/ 2 0 .

"0 imita dictu gravia, perpessu aspera Quae corpora exanclata atque animo pertulil" He almost certainly read Ao(not )• 'yvhere is his authority for ’animo'? The reading 'vwTaf

/ is uncertain and f vo / r/ i has been suggested on f the strength of Cicero's translation (but could ^ crT^f>y^ tin be used metaphorically with used literally?). It seems to me that Cicero's reading may well have been the same as ours^but that he desired a contrast which was lacking in ^ ^ and * vwTd/c-/, and deliberately altered his original. He may possibly have had in his mind Hercules' words in Euripides Alcestis 837: w iTàWci^ rXItToc K

(if this reading is correct, cf. Oxford text). It is not unusual for Cicero to insert a word or phrase in translating, the original of which is found in connection with the same subject but in a different context. Thus he translates (Iliad II, 309): by: "Jovis ut pulsu pèhetraret * • where Jovis pulsu' is almost a literal translation of t /oV^T/ t(od. XII, 190, etc.). So too, in his translation of Aratus (1. 620) he repeats a description < of/ 21.

of Aquarius which occurs in the Greek in the earlier passage only (1. 421), and in another passage (Cic., 1.664) he gives to Pistrix the epithet 'caerula', a I translation of ^ ' used of the same constellation in an earlier passage (Ar. 1.392) [ where Cicero sub­ stitutes 'spinifer* in his version (1. 422)j. Other lines of this passage from Sophocles where the reading is so doubtful as to make criticism of Cicero difficult are 1062 and 1069 (suspected by some scholars as an interpolation and omitted by Cicero in translating). In the three parts of this speech where Hercules describes his physical sufferings as the poison consumes him^Cicero shows himself capable of translating literally but does not always do so. The first part (Trach; 1053- 7) he translates fairly literally and his language is at least as poetic as the Greek. Liddell and Scott give

> f no other instance of used in poetry, and it is presumably somewhat prosaic. But I incline to think that more words denoting parts of the body were in common use in conversation and literature among the Greeks than among the Romans ( and us) ; so that it was easier for the Greek poets to describe physical affections in detail, without sinking below the level of poetic diction. Cicero's/ 2 2 .

Cicero's translation of y\Xw/005 ^ applied to blood^is interesting. He renders it 'decolor'. Liddell and Scott quote this passage from Sophocles as an example

of , meaning 'fresh', 'living', 'not dried up». This seems a possible meaning here, but is not how Cicero understood the word; and surely this is a case where Cicero is more likely to be right than modern scholars. He apparently understood by it 'pale', i.e. 'having lost its natural colour,' |compare Juvenal VI, 600: .....esses Âethiopis fortasse pater mox decolor heres impleret tabulas."

> A ^ V V Compare also Hipparchus' use of ' 0 /d * which is usually interpreted to mean'pale-red', and Aeschylus' \ / phrase Kpo k ofioLCj^^yjs n rd -y u jv (Ag: 1110) used of blood

) and usually interpreted as 'pale'.j This meaning of is quite as poetic and perhaps more probable than 'fresh' or 'living'. Hercules is not thinking of his blood as it was, but as it is. In the second passage describing physical pain (Trach. 1077-84) Cicero translates the first part briefly and omits the rest. For eight lines in the Greek he has only:- miserandum/ 23.

"... miserandum aspice evlsceratum corpus laceraturn patrisi" Seeing that his translation professes to be an example of lamentation for pain, this is extraordinary. Did he feel that the resources of his language were incapable of reproducing it? Or, did he really think that he had translated adequately? Certainly this method of de­ scribing savage mutilation of the body seems to have appealed to him. He translates 1.1053, 4: "Quae latere haerens morsu lacerat viscera" and we have seen that he uses a similar phrase for II. II, 316: "cui ferus imm^ni laniavit viscera morsu," where the Greek is quite.different in sense. The third passage (1.1088) is:

^ ^ _ ^v'à ^ - - - - ^

Cicero translates: "Nunc, nunc dolorum anxiferi torquent vertices Nuncm serpit ardor."

'Serpit ardor' must correspond to ^ and, of the two verbs and is a medical term, and is used only here in the saise of pain breaking out. Cicero translates the two words by one poetical metaphor. Possibly he regarded ' i as/ 2 4 .

as used metaphorically, i.e., poetically, here. In any case ^he judged that in Latin verse a somewhat poetic rendering was necessary. In the passage where Hercules appeals to the gods to end his misery (1. 1086. . .) Cicero's rendering is brief. The text of the Greek is doubtful; but if Cicero had before him the passage as it now stands his

>! >/ version seems weak. ifct.((rdv — / cL y j «% are all represented by *iace in me'; and 'caelestum sator' is inappropriate. A similar tendency to curtail his original is found in the last portion of the speech, where Hercules recalls the monsters which he has con­ quered. This is probably because Cicero tends to cur­ tail those passages which are not essential to tiie point which he is illustrating - in this case the power of physical and mental suffering. Yet in the lines containing Hercules' appeal to his son to stifle all feeling for his mother and to bring her out that vengeance may be taken ^Cicero » s transla­ tion is good (1. 1064):

w ' n c u y*L^rûZ O f TT o L t ^

RoC t yCt -vj T o yt<. TyO O ^ O V oy-t d L K V ^

^ i yu o / ^ 0? / cr-ocT / dL L/ T o ^ o I K o u w v" Tl K oT/W & S,/ Tw

Cicero translates:- "0 natal vere hoc nomenvusurpa patri Ne me occidentem matris superet caritas. Hue arripe ad me man!bus abstractam piis; Jam cernam, mene an il lam potiorem pûtes." In translating Cicero makes explicit

^ ______/ \ y the meaning of . / , v might be either an appeal to duty or to affection. Cicero translates it 'caritas* and contrasts it with 'pietas'. Hercules bids his son stifle affection and look to duty, i.e. his duty to his father and^a murderess. This is a good example of how Cicero sometimes uses a more, de­ finite word than his Greek original. He does not translate the word literally and leave the interpretation to the reader. He decides on his own interpretation and gives that (compare II. II 307, where he translates ' ' b y 'umbrifera' and » / 'aurigeris tauris'.) So too, when we come to 1.1061 of the present passage, we find ,

which Cicero reniers; "0 ante vie trices manus 0 pectora, 0 terga, 0 lacertorum tori I" The repetition ' w ' makes the exclamation one of pity. Why does Hercules pity his hards? Because they/ 26. they were formerly unconquered and are now for the first time suffering defeat. So too, a literal translation I - ! of Lo ^ t Ko! would not give the same effect as the Greek. Something different, but equally im­ pressive, must be substituted for it. Cicero selects the phrase *0 lacertorum tori! ’ Probably the sound of the line attracted him even more than the sense; but the sense is good. The presentation of a hero struggling with great physical and mental suffering is not uncommon in Greek literature. But such a presentation was new to Latin poetry. Cicero had to give a rendering which v/as as forceful as the original without being undignified or unpoetic in diction; and I think we may say that he has succeeded in both respects. His translations from Euripides compris e only a few short passages introduced into his pliilosophical writings. Most of them describe the sorrows of hiaman life. As I have said alx>ve, Cicero never quotes the dramatists to illustrate their qualities as poets. He never, for instance, mentions or illustrates Euripides' skill in depicting human passions. But Euripides intro­ duced into his plays many philosophical maxims and re­ flections/ 27.

flections on human life, tersely expressed. He, there­ fore, offered a choice selection of those herbs where­ with Cicero liked to flavour his ethical writings», in the hope of pleasing the Homan palate. The translations are clear and keep close to their original, but the expression is not always so terse as the Greek. Let us take one passage as an example (Eur: Hypsip: Nauck 767):

&WL7TTL/ TL /oLTi^oC K'Td^'Tcf-l yLoL.

S-/S y Q y "h / " oL v cLy ^ ^

Cicero translates (Tusc: III, § 59): "Mortalis nemo est quern non attingit dolor morbusque; multis sunt humandi liberi: rursum creandi: morsque est finita omnibus; quae generi humano angorem nequidquam ferunt. reddenda terrae est terra; turn vit^a omnibus metenda ut fruges. Sic iubet nécessitas.” In the first three lines Cicero's 'multis . . . omnibus' may be more strictly in accoi^ance with facts; but it

is less striking than Euripides' ^ - oLuT-o i Ti. The addition of 'morbusque' seems unnecessary and spoils the terseness of the Greek. It gives the impression of being inserted merely to fill out the line. But alterations in the second half of the quotation are/ 2 8 . are designed to emphasize the point which they are quoted to illustrate. The passage is quoted as an instance of consolation afforded by the reflection that no man is free from trouble, since death, the greatest of man's troubles, is a necessity of his nature. Cicero emphasizes this by using the gerundive construc­ tion 'reddenda terrae est terra', where the Greek has no such implication of necessity, and by putting his y / translation of oL^c^y^ s, at the very end of his quotation 'sic iubet nécessitas'. The passage which I have discussed seems to me to be representative of Cicero's translations from Euripides and I will therefore pass over the others without comment 29

CHAPTER IV.

Earlier Poets as Translators from the Greek.

Having examined those passages which Cicero has translated from Homer and the Greek tragedians it is interesting to compare them with earlier Latin trans­ lations of the same kind. Cicero, of course, was not the first Roman to translate the literature of the Greeks into Latin verse. Greek tragedies, Greek come­ dies, and Greek epic poetry had become known to the Romans throuÿi translations and paraphrases; and in­ deed it was Greek literature which inspired their earliest poets when they first began the creation of a Roman literary tradition. Unfortunately, very few examples of their work remain. But Cicero praises them highly - as poets - and it is worth considering their ability as translators. Livius Andronicus, the earliest of these poets, translated the Odyssey and many Greek tragedies. Cicero says of his work "est sic tanquam opus aliquod Daedali" (Brutus C. 18, § 71). From the few extant verses it is clear that he could translate very literal- ly*/ 30. ly. So he translates the first line: A/\ou 'TToXo'T^o !> o y/

(A. Gell: 18.9) "Viriun rnihi, Carrioena, insece versa turn. " and Od: I, 64: " /o / v ^ ir ^ i o v ^os (Prise: VI.8) "Mea puera quid verbi ex tuo ore supra fugit?" A , / \ ^ / O f »> and Od: VI, 142: yo\fVtov \i

1/6 oTi, Ky'yi

He uses'arcitenens'to translate the name of the constella­ tion (which he also translates ' sagittipotensj^O and 'bicorporem' of the Centaurs. But other compounds which Naevius invented were not adopted by Cicero, or any other writer. Such words are 'pudoricolor', an epithet of Aurora, and *trisaeclisenex' of Nestor. Here Naevius surpasses the Greeks themselves! Cicero, how­ ever, declines to follow him and says instead (de Senect: X 31): "tertiam enim iam aetatem hominum videbat”. Pacuvius also imitated the Greeks in coining com­ pound words* Quintilian (Arat: I 5) credits him with the lines: ”... Nerei repandirostrum Incurvicervicum pecus.”

. cry^oTTioofTLoTros, (Plato) and quoted by Quintilian))'. But Cicero and a H other Roman poets apparently felt like Quintilian: ”res tota magis Graecos decet nobis minus succedit, nec id fieri natura puto sed alienis favemus: ideoque quum mirati sumus, incurvicervicum vix a risu defendimus.” Cicero seems to have been very cautious about coining new adjectives for the adornment of his poetry. Clavel has noted that nearly all the poetical epithets which it is reasonable to suppose were created by Cicero are/ 32

are compounds of 'gerere, 'ferre' and (more rarely) 'facere'; e.g. ’squamlger», 'ignifer', horriflcus,' We come now to the translations of Ennius, perhaps the greatest and certainly the most influential poet among Cicero's predecessors. His translations are from the Greek tragic drama. From the fragments which re­ main to us they seem tc have been very free translations; probably more free than Livius ', and certainly more free than Cicero's. Take for example the opening lines of Ennius 'Medea' and compare it with its original, the 'Medea* of Euripides; è* LjC^iX «J/oc 7T/V (T^ot / G'KoiCpoSi

K A X )(w V t-s ctloLV vdLTTe^icr^/ TT^Xiou IT tcrC iv TTo'TS. ^ G w (T^ o T T o 7foL y u (T à S*Ly>oS, 77V\l'c^ y^^T^XôàV. ûi yc

Ennius renders it: ”utinamne in nemore Pelio securibus caesa cecidisset abiegna ad terram trabes, neve inde navis inchoandae exordium coepisset, quae nunc nominatiir nomine Argo, quia Argivi in ea dilecti viri vecti petebant pellem inauratarn arietis Colchis, imperio regis Peliae, per doluml nam nunquam hera errans me a domo exferret pedem Medea, animo aegra amore saevo saucia." Ennius/ 33.

Ennius gives the main points of his original and arranges them in chronological order. He begins with the forest, and then describes the axes, the falling pine, the ship, its name, its crew, the purpose for which it was constructed, and its destination. But the Greek introduces the ship named, and already at its destination, Colchis. Only after we know these things are we told the history of its origin. The dramatic superiority of the Greek is obvious. We know at once that we are dealing v/ith the ship, * Argo ', after it has come to Colchis. In Ennius* version we have to wait for two and a half lines before we hear of a ship - five lines before we are told it is the 'Argo' - and seven lines before we know that it was bound for Colchis. Not only is the Greek speech more suited to arrest the attention of the audience, but it is a far more natural speech for a person to make. The nurse would naturally exclaim: ^

ff Xj Apyo*^s SîoCî t t c l t (TKoiC^ôSii but she-would never think of saying: "Utinam in nemore Pelio securibus.* It is interesting to speculate on how Cicero would have dealt with the passage. I am inclined to think that he would have treated it rather as Ennius has done and/ 3 4 .

and would have given a coherent account of the events in chronological order. We know that he liked to do this from his re-arrangement of Aratus* disjointed account of the rising and setting of certain constellations (Aratus 669), and his swift and uninterrupted account of the snake's movements after it first appeared at the sacrifice (Iliad II 308). Like Ennius,he would veiy probably have omitted to mention the Symplegades, as not essential to the narrative; or, if he had translated that line, would either have omitted ' ’ or sub­ stituted another epithet (compare his translation of Aratus, 1.398. Cic: 422). He would almost certainly have employed alliteration as in the last line of Ennius' version (compare Cicero's version of Orion's death. Aratus 634. Cic: 666). However Cicero might have treated this first passage^ he certainly would not have gone to Ennius* length of rendering the opening words of Medea's first speech, * yu v^ot^/RlSf .

"Quae Corinthum arcem altam habetis, matronae -opulentae Optima tes I In this he would not have vied with Erinius, though his rendering might have been more elaborate than its original (compare his translation of Plato's 'Timaeus*, 41A: 35.

*, ^-^/^fûupyôS-- ZpyuiyTff which he renders:

"Haec VOS qui deorum satu orti estis, attendite. Quorum operum ego . • • • Some of the short fragments of Ennius* translations are quite literal. For example; TToikc^^oVllcH w v S^o-rrai \ /. ' ' P» ■>/ \ ‘ f T»'J t TTT/O T ^ Oo SS TF^kdLiÇ-lI T u k d L t Ç - l T>jyd T ^ j y d cLyoLy ôÔ uu ^ i^cffjjKoLSi^-hKcLS cKuT':^ à~uT->\ dpôot

CHAPTER V.

Cicero's translations from Aratus.

We come now to the longest of Cicero's verse trans­ lations, his version of Aratus' "Phenomena". It was presumably the earliest of his translations, for he himself tells us that it was made in early youth. In the "de Natura Deorum" (II §104) he makes Balbus say: "uter...... carmihibus Arateis, quae, a te (sc. Cicerone) admodum adolescentulo conversa, ita me delectant, quia Latina sunt, ut multa ex eis memoria teneam." Our knowledge of this translation comes from Cicero's philosophical writings (especially the "de Natura Deorum") and from quotations cited by ancient writers. But when all these quotations have been pieced together we have less than two thirds of the poem. An exact description of the fancied figures made in the sky by the stars, their positions, and rising and setting relative to one another, does not seem promising material for a poem. The same ideas 'above', 'below', 'upright', 'slanting', 'bright', 'dim', 'extending', 'moving', must occur over and over again, and it is often difficult,/ 38 difficult, as for example, in describing the track of the five circles, to avoid giving a mere list of con­ stellations. It is not, therefore, surprising to learn that Aratus based his poem on a treatise in prose by Endoxus^and it is hard to see why he chose to turn it into verse, or what inspired Cicero and later writers to translate Aratus* poem. But didactic poems on scien­ tific subjects (especially Astronomy), were popular with i the poets who shared with men of science the patronage of the Macedonian and Alexandrian courts and with the Roman poets who were their literary successors. Though the "Phenomena" is didactic in form, there is no reason to suppose that Aratus intended it to be of practical use; nor is there any scientific theory in the poem. It was apparently written (and translated) purely as a literary effort. Cicero says (de Arat; 1,69): "Si constat inter doctos hominem ignarum astrologiae ornatissimis atque optimis versibus Aratum de caelo stellisque dixisse...... quid est cur non orator...." This conception of the poem gives the key note to Cicero's translation. He is reproducing a work which is primarily a poem. Its scientific value is a secondary considera­ tion. He concentrates his attention on the writing of brilliant descriptions and does not hesitate to embellish Aratus */ 39

Aratus' statements wherever he is able to do so. Cicero's translation is written, like its original, in dactylic hexameters. Of his poem there remain several fragpients and 480 lines, consecutive except for twelve gaps with a total omission of about twenty lines. These 480 lines translate about 470 lines of Aratus. This shows clearly that Cicero does not elaborate his original very extensively. For he does not often omit in trans­ lating, and so compensate for the elaboration of one pas­ sage by condensing or curtailing another. In comparing Cicero's version with its Greek ori­ ginal it will be found that he gives, as a rule, a clear, accurate translation which is at least as spirited as the Greek. In one way his poem is more didactic in tone than Aratus'. He frequently inserts 'cernes' or 'videbis' or a similar word where Aratus lias a direct statement.

For example, (Aratus, 1.147) Kp^'ri St of ûiSuycor is translated (Cicero 151): "Et natos Geminos invises sub caput Arcti." and ( Arat : 254) translated (Cic: 261): "locates...... Vergilias...... videbis." But some of Aratus' admonitions and descriptions of dis­ asters which follow certain celestial phenomena, are omitted/ 40 omitted or curtailed by Cicero, who keeps more closely to description of the phenomena only. In this respect his peom gives an impression of being less didactic than its original. Where the subject is intricate Cicero translates freely. Take for example the lines describing 'the dog days'. Aratus says (1.332) of Sirius oixlr, ^

y«.> ot/ ^crr,X*i _ Kdi) VL>puj

Cicero translates (1.355):- "Hie ubi se parlter cum sole in lutnina caeli Extulit, haud patitur foliorum tegmine frustra Suspenses animos arbusta ornata tenere. Nam quorum stirpis tellus amplexa prehendit Haec augens anima vitali flamina mulcet: At quorum nequeunt radices findere terras Denudat foliis ramos et cortice truneos." Compare also his description of Argo (Cic^370. Arat.342) and of the planets (Cic.467. Arat.454). In passages where the Greek is obscure or redundant Cicero often recasts the thought, selecting the main points and setting them out more clearly. Consider, for instance, the lines (399....) in which Cicero explains that the astronomer who first named the constellations did not recognise dim and apparently unconnected stars, but only the bright ones which together formed groups. The/ 41

The corresponding 19 lines of Aratus (367-85) are full of repetition and irrelevant remarks. Similarly in the passage beginning at 1.709 (Aratus 669) Cicero puts the facts in an order which is much clearer than the original. The information which Aratus is giving is that (A) When the Archer rises (1) the lower part of the Charioteer (2) Perseus, except his foot and knee (3) Argo except the stern, all set, and (B) when the Goat rises (1) the upper part of the Charioteer and (2) the stern of Argo, set, and (C) also, the kids and Olenian Goat do not set when the Archer rises. Cicero re-casts the passage and makes all this perfectly clear. As Aratus has already given, in the preceding passage, some constellations which set when the Archer rises, Cicero gives the rest of these constellations next (i.e. A.1,2,3) and then those which set when the Goat rises (i.e. B.1,2) and, instead of in­ forming us when the kids and Olenian Goat do not set, he tells us when they do. He omits Aratus* reference to the storms brought by the Kids, which is entirely out of place in its context. It is clear, therefore, that though as a rule Cicero translates quite literally he is never a slavish imitator. He paraphrases, or elaborates, or simplifies, or omits deliberately./ 42 deliberately. Let us consider a little more carefully some of the passages in which he omits ideas which Aratus has expressed. These passages are not numerous and Cicero may be assumed to have had a good reason for each omission. Some words and phrases are probably unrepre­ sented in the Latin because they seemed to him otiose. For instance, after describing the Bird (1.281..) he omits to translate (Aratus 278) ^ oLÙToip o ^ISio^yrTi TroT-^v opYi9i î-oiKu)S oZpios, / C^S-pt—o<.( ------presumably because the. direction in which the bird is flying is made clear by the following two lines, and there is no point in A / o vTi u (Unless Aratus is contrasting this Bird with the Eagle which he describes (1.312) as *wind-tossed'.) So too, in the passage where Aratus describes the Altar as exhibiting signs of a coming storm (408...) Cicero omits a large part of the description of the storm-tossed ship and Night's concern for mariners. In translating Aratus' description of the Milky Way (469..) Cicero (489....) omits what he doubtless judges to be not only irrelevant but confusing, and goes straight to the point. So, too, where Aratus speaks of the late hours kept by Bootes Cicero omits the rather poetic idea of Bootes' unyoking his oxen. He refers to him only as Arctophylax./ 4 3

Arctophylax. Aratus (1.582) says

3ûuK,oT^ irKCtcv SI ^oL Vt^KToS 1 o v(T^^ , and Cicero translates:- (1.610) "...... turn serius ipse Cuiti super a sese satiavit luce recedlt Post mediam labens claro cum corpore noctem.” I can only suggest that the rustic touch did not appeal to Cicero, and seemed to him pointless. With regard to the omission of epithets and quali­ fying phrases it is noticeable that Cicero tends to omit epithets which are inapplicable to stars, though suit­ able to the object after which they are named. So, where Aratus (1.594) has A oLy w ^ ^ Cicero gives only *lepus* (1.623) and where Aratus (1.598) has Cicero (1.623) has 'sagitta*; and when Aratus, speaking of the time when the Hare sets, (not of its position in relation to Sirius) says (1.677) , / Kcc'/ 7T(ii/Tdk / OS TTdixrrd- yt. dlTL \s.(TToL Si ^ ^ ^ Cicero translates (1.716): "Abditur Orion, obit et Lepus abditus umbra." The passages where Cicero adds to his original are far more numerous than those in which he curtails or omits. They reveal two principal aims. One is a desire to make the meaning more . explicit, and'the other to em­ bellish the subject so that it is vivid and interesting. Let/ 44

Let us take first passages which are treated more fully for the sake of clearness. Cicero never forgets that he is writing for his fellow countrymen and that his poem will be read and valued most by those who do not read Aratus in the original. For this reason he frequently inserts a line to explain a Greek name which he has in­ troduced. He writes ( 1.37) : "ex his altera apud Graeos Cynos^ura vocatur" where Aratus has only (1.36) / hrA yu-w K'uVO

"Orbom Signiferum perhibebunt nomine vero." But it is to be noted that Cicero does not invariably give the Greek name - with or without an explanation of it. In 1.262 he translates by 'Vergiliae* without comment. Does this mean that the Latin word was much commoner than the Greek form, * Pleiades*? Or does Cicero connect the word with *virgo* (cf Vergil and Virgil) and use it here for that reason? (There seems to be no scientific basis for that etymology). He intro­ duces Aquarius and Capricornus without giving their Greek names, presumably because the Latin names were commoner and had the same meaning (1.290, 293). It is not, I think, out of place while discussing Cicero's practice of explaining Greek words for the bene­ fit of his Latin readers to consider one or two other pas­ sages in which the question of etymology arises. When Cicero is describing the Eagle (1.312) his version of Aratus is interesting. Aratus in his description connects >1 the word o/'>^t o s with the verb - not, as Liddell and Scott do, because of its swift flight, but because it is blown by the wind. (Aratus 312):

______o f s O/ 7T^fSc

diov . çrJ(^£Soâ^v^ e^XXos d-ijToi.

V X ' ^ _ _ , _ K.^1 AiocXl ou CT» x/ oL'fj/OV,

Cicero/ 46

Cicero renders it (1.326): "Quam propter nitons pinnis convolvitur Ales Haec clinata magis paullo est Aquilonis ad auras. At propter se Aquila ardent! cum corpore portât." He does not comment on the derivation of the Greek word for eagle, nor does he state openly the derivation of Aquila (this would transgress the limit of a trans­ lator's licence); but it is difficult to believe that he does not connect Aquila with Aquilo in the preceding line. Aquilo is there in its own right as a translation / of CO ; but the fact that Cicero puts the two words so close together suggests that he intended their like­ ness to be noticed. He probably accepts Aratus' deri- >1 vat ion of <^^T~ûS from , but believes tiiat there is a similar connection between the words for'wind' and 'eagle' in Latin, and uses them as being of greater interest to Latin readers. Another interesting passage concerns a description of the Great Bear. Aratus (1.92) says of Arctophylax To V K Xtf o u

npKTôf^ is a curious phrase. Liddell and Scott/ 47

Scott quote only this and one other example of the ad­ jective and translate it 'wain-like'. In the only other passage where Aratus mentions the Wain he says (1.27) /fpACT'o/ cy^cL Tpo^o*^

(and thereafter describes the constellations as 'bears'). He says they are called because they wheel to-

c, it get her, i.e. he derives from oy*cL -k (t He apparently took n p ^T o o in its literal meaning of a c. / bear and s to mean not 'wain-like' but 'con­ nected with a wain' (compare 'cart-horse'). So he arrived at the conception of a bear yoked to a wain. An interesting point arises where Cicero (1.365) trans­ lates (Ar.358) by 'leyipes Lepus'. The epithet is not entirely unsuitable here, as Cicero, like Aratus, goes on to describe how the Hare is being pursued by the Dog. But no epithet/ 48 epithet is used in the Greek and it looks as though Cicero was tempted to introduce a piece of Latin ety­ mology on his own initiative. For he undoubtedly sug­ gests that'lepus' is derived from 'levis' and 'pes'. Besides explaining Greek and Latin words, Cicero inserts other explanations where he thinks that Aratus has not made his meaning clear. The passage already quoted which describes the effect of the dog-days on vegetation is a good example* ^K a o v

w L TTc^yrT^ (Ar.335) is translated (Cic:358) ; "Nam quorum stirpis tellus amplexa prehendit Haec augens anima vitali flamina mulcet At quorum nequeunt radices findere terras Denudat foliis ramos et cortice truncos." In the same way he adds a line in explanation of Aratus' demand that ships should be beached before night in November (1.312): "Nam iam turn nimis exiguo lux tempore praesto est." and when Aratus says that Hercules rises and sets in one night Cicero adds: "Persaepe ut parvum tranans gerainaverit orbem." In one place he explains with some ingenuity a word whose meaning he has almost certainly misunderstood. Aratus is describing the constellation Perseus and says

(1.254) yriyUti^a s 4-k A d TTotTp /. K ^ K o v o S, is/ 49

is surely used here in its metaphorical sense of 'in haste'. There would be no point in calling a constel­ lation 'dusty'. It is true that Aratus does sometimes use epithets which are inapplicable to stars, but these

are all characteristic epithets, e.g. t t o / O'itj-Tds ^ y wc. . Perseus was not invariably travel-stained, and he is given his characteristic mark in the preceding line" Tranv which Cicero translates "pedes vinctis talaribus aptis." But Cicero labours to explain the literal meaning of

yyLA. it^ds and renders the lines (1.259): "pede s...... pulverulentus uti de terra elapsu' repente in caelum victor magno sub culmine portât." Sometimes Cicero is at pains to make clearer a re­ ference to a Greek legend. In speaking of the river Eridanus, Aratus says (1.359): ^

Cicero renders the passage (1.389): "Namque etiam Eridanum cernes in parte locatura Caeli funestum magnis cum viribus amnem Quern lacrimis maestae Phaethontis saepe sorores Sparserunt letum maerenti voce canentes." So too, where Aratus, describing the constellation of Perseus, says that his right hand is stretched (1.251) 50 ------^ m K AI oyr _ — . Tf*L\/ Ù o yj o

(towards the seat of his mother-in-law's couch) Cicero (1.257) says simply and clearly "ad sedes Cassiepiae"; and when Aratus explains that lady's undignified exit (1.657): ) / 4.77tr Oo K ocp iyu S À À L V" ^ ^

Cicero says more explicitly (1.698): "Hanc illi trihuunt poenam Nereides almae Cum quibus ut perhibet ausa est contendere forma." But Cicero does not only amplify his original when he wants to make the meaning clearer. Sometimes he elaborates an idea entirely for poetic effect. He tries to make his poem more vivid and beautiful than its ori­ ginal. Where, for instance, Aratus introduces the Lion with the words (1.148): . / TTdC-r-.' &' lTTioi

Cicero, with more sense of what is due to the king of beasts, renders the line (1.152): " pe dibus que tenetur magnu' Leo tremulam quatiens e corpore flaramam." Again, when Aratus enumerates certain constellations which set at the same time and says (1.597): T ô T - t ^ IS \r Ô U (Ti Cicero/ 61

Cicero thinks of the dolphin as homeward bound and translates (1.627): "Cedit Clara Fides Cyllenia, mergitur undS^ Delphinus." And when he speaks of the unfortunate Andromeda he des­ cribes her more vividly than Aratus. Aratus (1.353) says: Si Ku) ÔX'.yov TY iTT-Trr^-yi'

which Cicero translates (1.383): "Exin semotam procul in tutoque locatari Andromedam tamen explorans fera quaerere Pistrix Pergit." The eagerness of the monster is emphasised but we are assured that Andromeda is safe. Later on, when Aratus again refers to Andromeda and the sea monster in the words (1.629) : Si o/

Cicero expatiates on her precarious position (1.661): "Occidit Andromedae clarum caput et fera Pistrix Labitur, horribiles epulas funesta requirens." It is in connection with Andromeda that Cicero makes his only serious error of taste. Aratus gives the information (useful to one who is trying to pick out the constella­ tions and therefore a necessary part of his treatise) that one common star shines on the horses navel and the tip of Andromeda's/ 62

Andromeda * s head ( 1.206 ) : &' ^t-Tr,\’<^yu.rrtTa., c^-c-T^p / \T tu» T . ^ ^ e V r^S

Cicero translates (1.209): "Huic equus ille... •Summum contingit caput alvo stellaque iungens Una tenet duplices coinmuni lumine formas." and adds "Aeternum ex astris cupiens connecters nodum." The only possible justification tliat I can suggest for such a line is in Platon's "Ti^naeus" (C.4,§ 38) which Cicero translates (C.1V,§ 38): " mundum efficere raoliens deus ter ram primum ignemque iungebat: omnia autern duo ad cohaerendum tertium aliquid anquirunt et quasi nodum vinclumque desiderant." If we can suppose that this passage was in Cicero's mind we may see some point and dignity in the present passage from Aratus. The passage where Cicero's elaboration for poetic effect is most marked and most successful is the account of Orion's death from the Scorpion's bite. The whole story is translated freely but the second part is especial­ ly striking. Aratus gives it in four lines (1.640): , ,/ si I o ^\\o.

Cicero/ 53

Cicero (1*678) gives the following description: "At vero pedibus subito perculsa Dianae Insula discessit disiectaque saxa revellens Percullt et caecas lustravit luce lacunas; Equibus ingenti exstitit cum corpore prae se Scorpios infestus praeportans flebile acumen Hie valido cupide venantem percullt ictu Mortiferum in venas figens per vulnera virus Ille gravi moriens constravit corpore terram." In some instances Cicero adds to the vividness of his version by inserting an epithet or qualifying plirase for which there is no authority in the Greek. Thus he writes (1.332): "Turn magni curvus Capricorni corpora propter Delphinus iacet....." where there are no adjectives in the Greek. So we find (1.344) "truculenti Tauri". And later, where speaking of the Hydra, Aratus says (1.445): ^ r _ _ — _ _ - ~ ot K.î^ eL s_

Cicero embellishes this rather bare description thus:- (1.460) "Haec caput atque oculos torquens ad terga Nepal Convexoque slnu subiens inferna Leonis Centaurum leni contingit lubrica cauda." f \ When Aratus (1.398) speaks of a star as situated K.u c^»/ ^T^os ^ Cicero ignores the conventional epithet of the sea-monster (how could a constellation seen in the night skies be Ku cL \r & o ^ ?) and renders the line (422)/ 5 4

(422): "Splnlferam subter caudam Pistricis adhaesit." - surely a more gruesome creature I (•But Cicero does not always avoid this conventional epithet. He says of Cetus (1.664): "Ilia usque ad spinam mergens se caerula condit," where Aratus has and no epithet, cf Cicero 1.384 "pistrix caerula", Aratus 354 ; and Cicero 1.521 "....caeruleam...caudam Pistricis", f y t Aratus 1.502 oop'>|V onlyf. We come now to a particular method of increasing the effectiveness of his poem which is used by Cicero in al­ most every line^and seems to me to be the strongest ciiar- acteristic of his translation and that which gives it a J) different tone from its original. I mean the constant use of words connoting light. Aratus has put into verse a comparatively accurate and elaborate description of the constellations^including their risings and settings, the course of the five Circles, and certain signs of wind, rain or heat. He succeeds in making his poem more than a bare enumeration of facts by describing the constellations as living creatures, con­ scious and moving, and by references to myths connected with them. So he describes the Hare (1.338): 65

TT^xPcTiV S' ujy/^ûS U %r ' d/(T/ A c L y c o û S ^ \ >f ' n i :> \ ç I , ^ \ yA yu S- %rg ^ -yyx. cLTcL HcLr-'Tck. cS f LU fC L T < ^ / ' cL u T d ^ p ^ y ot/£,/

Z. /o^ ?T/ <^

K dA o t i^'ïT 1~ L \ \ ^ f f^oL t yu (y- fCd T f <) t/ f cL K i ^ u L f ^ and the Bird (1.275): ' ^ T D ( Koc', '1 -y^y, Tr<*pccTp>Ll^i,y!o'Aôj apv,;, ...... dluTc^/3 O y' io ^ . é u ^ v n TToT^'v 0/»>r, ^/ £-^>/»cws »' c , __ /• and Andromeda (1.202): , __ iKV' 5 , u , x w , ^

f / o," K U r ^ , K^', ------

Besides a constant reference to myths, he embellishes his poem with the story of the Maiden ( Justice )^ and of Orion's death. The didactic nature of the poem gives op­ portunities for such treatment as tiiat of the Milky Way (1.465..) and of the storm at sea (1.408). Cicero reproduces all these characteristics, but stresses some and curtails others so as to leave the reader with a rather different impression from that which Aratus gives him. Aratus portrays the heavens primarily as a "storied window"; Cicero as "a storied window richly dight". Never does he regard the stars as mere symbols - grouped together by men of old, and thereafter used by them to mark the time of night, forecast the weather, and recall bid legends. For him each star is a beautiful reality - bright, glittering, gleaming, whether "evalida cum/ 56 cum luce refulgens" or "exiguo candore nitescit." Accordingly, Cicero uses words connoting light whenever he can do so without weakening^or seriously changing the sense of his original. A few statistics help to confirm this impression which a perusal of the poem must give. Cicero uses words or phrases connoting light about 120 times in 480 lines. About 70 of these have no cor­ responding reference to light in the Greek. Moreover, in 10 passages where Aratus uses altogether 11 words con­ noting light Cicero uses 29 in translating. Of nouns connoting light he uses 'stella' 13 times (where occurs only 6 times), 'lumen' 47 times, 'lux' 12 times, 'fulgor' 6 times and 'sidus*, Jaster', 'nitor', 'ardor', 'flamma', 'ignis' occasionally; of verbs he uses 'fulgeo' (or 'refulgeo') 15 times, 'lucere' (or 'conlucere' or 'relucere') 12 times, 'nitescere' 5 times, 'micare' and 'radiare' each 4 times, and occasionally 'ardere', 'flagrare', 'fervere', 'clarare', 'lustrare'; of adjectives he uses 'clarus' (or 'praeclarus') 9 times, 'illustris' 5 times, 'fervidus' 4 times, 'rutilus' 3 times, (besides many par­ ticiples, qualifying nouns e.g. 'fulgens', 'nitens'). Reckoning together nouns, verbs, and adjectives, Cicero uses 31 different Latin words. Aratus uses 27 different Greek words. Considering the comparative poverty of Latin/ 57

Latin compared, with Greek this is significant. In 24 places Cicero adds an epithet connoting light where there is no epithet of any kind in the Greek. The most striking examples occur in the enumeration of the signs of the zodiac. Aratus gives merely a list of their names. Cicero adds to most of them an epithet. (Cicero 1.566): "Aestifer est pandens ferventia sidera Cancer. Hunc subter fulgens cedit vis torva Leonis Quem rutilo sequitur conlucens corpore Virgo. Exinprojectae claro cum lumine Chelae Ipsaque consequitur lucens vis magna Mepai." The description of the Claws as 'claro cum lumine' is actually wrong. Aratus says in three places (1.89, 520, 607) that the Claws is not a bright constellation. In two of these Cicero translates him accurately. (His ver­ sion of the third is lost). In the present passage his enthusiasm for epithets of light is indulged at the ex­ pense of truth and even consistency. Besides the addition of such epithets^Cicero sœietimes substitutes such an epithet for a different epithet in the Greek. This change seems to be based on his desire to des­ cribe the stars themselves rather than the objects which theyrepresent. Many of Aratus' epithets have no meaning as applied to stars. For example, Aratus (1.440) speaks of SïVl<)T'ô'iû (the round altar), and Cicero (1.457) renders it 'illustrem aram'. Where Aratus, (1.163) has/ 68 has 0^»^ , Cicero (1.167) says *oapra.... r* Clara*; and when Aratus says (1.6913,) Oi^io tv / Tî-/yo£-oc Cicero gives only 'clara Sagitta* (1.724). Similarly where Cicero lias only * clara Pides* Aratus has c / Aup'v^ (1.674). When Aratus describes

Orion (1.588) as icf>i tt-ltto i è

Cicero goes straight for the portrayal of Orion wliich this implies and says (l.SSçS): "retinens non cas sum luminis ensem." In connection with this alteration of Greek epithets and phrases in Cicero's version it is interesting to note that^where Aratus seeks to dignify his subject by sugges­ ting that some of the constellations inspire wonder and dread Cicero is inclined to ignore tliis conception of them. The substitution of 'clara' for noticed above, is an instance of this; and when Aratus, speaking of Ophiuchus, says (1.84): iro y Cicero (1.90) says: "atque oculos urguet pedibus pectusque Nepai". and when Aratus says (1.402): l/TT^ TSyOoC d y c 1 y X 0 /

Z K ôy It t o u Cicero gives only (1.427): "inde Kepae cernes propter fulgentis acumen..." When/ 59

When Aratus introduces the Horse with the words {1*205):

'z.TTcX.y XdLT^Lf lu7tôS>

Cicero substitutes for TTS. (1*209): "iubam quatiens fulgore micanti*" ^ He apparently regards the Greek words as mere devices for emphasizing the noun to which they are attached; or, for filling out the line so that the important noun can be reserved for the beginning of a new line. His treatment of in the following passage / suggests that he regarded it merely as emphasizing y ^ \ru s Aratus says of Sirius (1*330):

4 si 0/ > t f V ' Cl c. / . oLirTi-y/ K Kprd. 0 o-S-zya '

"Atque uno mentum radiant! sidere lucet."

That is, he omits voi o TriXtu^oiy but adds 'trucibus' to 'oculis*. It is interesting to find in his prose translation the same vacillation between a literal ren­ dering of and the substitution of a different, but equally emphatic, word. He says (^de Pin."^11,016) : "oculorum, inquit Plato, est in nobis sensus acerrlmus; quibus sapientiam non cernimus. Quam ilia ardent is amores excitaret suil" The Greek of this last sentence is (Plato. Phaedr: C .65):

Yet in another place, (de Off.I,§ 14) referring to the same passage in Plato, Cicero says; "quae si oculis cerneretur, ut ait Plato, mirabiles amores excitaret sapientiae." In the few passages where Aratus has occasion amid his astronomical observations to speak of human beings Cicero's translation is severer in tone. Where Aratus suggests that men must be mistaken who assume that there are seven Pleiads^whereas only six stars are visible^ (1.259) and says:

ÔÜ yUl It U j S

Cicero translates (1.265): "At non interiisse putari convenit unam Sed frustra temere a vulgo rations sina ulla Septem/ 61

"Septem dlcler^ut veteres statuera poetae." Again, when Aratus emphasizes the brightness of Or ion in rather indirect language (1,323); ÔV/S ViyKTl

TTtTTT-ij CjTeL I (L ili->tOi

Cicero translates encouragingly (1.345): "Quem qui suspicions in caelum nocte serena Late dispersum non viderit, haud ita vero Cetera se speret cognoscere signa potesse." Compare also his description of the five circles where his language is more vigorous than Aratus'. (A.529,0.548). There are a few passages in which Cicero's meaning is obviously different from Aratus'. Does Cicero mis­ understand Aratus, or does he think that he is correcting an inaccurate statement? We know that he regarded Aratus primarily as a poet and only secondarily as an astronomer. But he regarded himself as firstly a poet, secondly a translator^and only thirdly - if at all - as an astronomer. We should therefore expect him to translate rather tlian correct. Moreover, in the two passages where the dis­ crepancy is most noticeable it seems clear that Cicero mis­ understood Aratus. In one of them (1.332-42) Cicero says that the stars on the Dolphin's head lie between the North and the ecliptic circle and that the lower part of the Dolphin/ 62

Dolphin lies between the ecliptic circle and the South, i.e., the ecliptic circle cuts the Dolphin in two (1.333): "Delphinus iacet haud nimio lustratu' nitore praeter quadruplices stellas in fronte locatas... Illae quae fulgent luces ex ore corusco sunt inter partes gelidas Aquiloni' locatae Atque inter spatiura et laeti vestigia Solis. At pars inferior iam pertractanda videtur inter Solis iter simul inter flamina venti viribus erumpit qua summi spiritus Austri." But the dolphin is wholly North of the ecliptic circle. The Greek is (Ar.316):

A i\ ( p ^ S 2'ou ,

______T.' si oT Try,'

Modern commentators understand by not dif­ ferent parts of the Dolphin, but different constellations. Some, including the Dolphin, lie North of the ecliptic circle, and others South. This seems to be Aratus' meaning; and Cicero has not understood it. Nor, apparently, does he know enough about the stars to perceive that his inter­ pretation must be wrong. In the second passage Cicero misses the point com­ pletely. Aratus is describing the order in which the con­ stellations set. He says that most of the Bird sets when the/ 63 the Malden rises. (1.596): oJ ÔY (iSxKi-, X\ow(r«L ' ' , , > x ffù v T 0I& "O p r.à o i irpCiTdL TT-tY cL "Y ^''^'1 ' * and later on, he says that the tip of the Bird's tail sets at the same time as the Horse. (1.627):

T^ycos Jiiro / KS^<^oc\*>|V y-vS_Tol Su ; ITT n y y K.d-\ 'bpviO^oS \ K tT*^/

In translating this latter passage, Cicero apparently regards the bird as merely explaining the position of the Horse, for he says (1.659): "Hie se lam totum caecas Equus abdit in umbras quem rutila fulgens pluma praetervolat Ales." In view of the earlier passage this must be a wrong in­ terpretation. We may note here a curious ambiguity of meaning in Cicero's version. In 1.460 he uses 'Nepas' for the Crab. Except in that one place,-he always calls the Scorpion 'Nepas' and the Crab 'Cancer'. Such a confusing interchange of names is difficult to excuse - if indeed we have what Cicero really wrote. But passages where Cicero's translation is clearly inadequate are few. Considering the poem as a whole, we may say, I think, that it is usually an accurate, and al­ ways/ 64 ways an interesting, version. It may be called accurate because it means what the original means. Cicero seldom omits a statement or misrepresents it. But, by re-arran­ ging the material and omitting what is irrelevant, he avoids the obscurity and confusion of some of Aratus' writing. He accepts the subject matter and tries to ex­ press it more clearly and more beautifully tiian Aratus. His work is primarily a poem and secondarily a trans- , lation; for it omits some of the characteristic faults of the original. Yet if we compare it with the versions of Germanicus and Avienus we see at once how much more faithful Cicero is to his original than are other Roman translators. Is this faithfulness due to Cicero's conception of a translator's duty, or is it due to his inability to translate more freely? A passage like the story of Orion^^ suggests that he was willing to fly higher than Aratus when inspiration enabled him to do so. This suspicion is strengthened when we turn to his translations from Aratus' "Prognostics" or Weather Signs^ which he made, not in early youth, but when his powers were fully matured. Less than thirty lines of his version remain, but they are extremely interesting; for they are much less literal and more poetic tiian most of his trans­ lation/ 65 lation of the "Phenomena". Compare with its original the lines which give the signs of coming wind and storm. The Greek is (-Aratus Progn: 177 (Phen:909)-)-:

n-o, d iY y ^ o io o^ildi^rou(rd. &cL\ci^(r<<

y^yyricrôu) ckiy/oL\o/^ (3ôocoi^r£S

d .K T d .1 T oTToT S t Û r

yiVos/'Tdt , & y (_,(p TL po C j y S_ Z Oop> t oS oCAcpot Z

This is truly an enumeration of signs v/ith little at­ tempt at poetry. The same word ocv is used for both phenomena. But Cicero varies his vocabulary and makes vivid pictures out of the signs described. He says (1.177): "Atque etiam ventos praemonstrat saepe futures Inf la turn mare^jcum subito penitusque tumescit, Saxaque cana salis niveo spumata liquore, Tristificas certant Neptuno reddere voces; Aut densus stridor cum celso e vertice mentis Ortus ada^gescit scopulorum saepe repulsus." One cannot help comparing his version with Virgil's (Georg: I 356): "Continue ventis surgentibus aut fréta ponti Incipiunt agitata tumescere et aridus altis Montibus audiri fragor, aut resonantia longe Litora misceri et nemorum increbrescere murmur." Virgil elaborates the phenomenon on land - the wind in the trees - while Cicero concentrates his attention on the sea-shore. In this he is nearer to Aratus. But in his vivid pictorial treatment of the weather signs, he is is much nearer to Virgil than to Aratus. As in his use/ 66 use of the dactylic hexameter, Cicero improves greatly on Aratus, though he is inferior to Virgil. In another passage, describing signs of coming rain, Cicero shows a far keener sense of what is poetic than Aratus. This is Aratus' way of saying 'frogs'. (Progn: 214 Phen: 946):

______kck-i t lYcJV dLuTÔ acv uS ,^T 0X ÎTc.Tyî-1 (boouj^,

Even though the metre does forbid the use of j^ikTpxy^ such paraphrases are surely unjustifiable. Cicero rea­ lises their absurdity and renders the lines (1.216): "Vos quoque signa videtis aquai dulces alumnae Cum clamore paratis inanes fundere voces Absurdoque sono fontes et stagna cietis," The details are less graphic, but the description is far more poetic and more appropriate to its context. It is worth noticing how Virgil treats the subject. He strikes the mean between Aratus and Cicero. He shuns the extra­ vagance of Aratus and is more definite than Cicero. He says (Georgies I 378): "Et veterem in limo ranae cecinere querelam" - no more, no less. In the same passage of his translation we find Cicero elaborating a single line of Aratus' to an unusual ex­ tent,/ 67 tent. His intention is clearly to make poetry out of his material, but the repetition of the same ideas, with­ out the addition of anything fresh, seems weak. Aratus says (Aratus Progn: 216, Phen: 948): ^ ôp&piYOy/ oXôXuytoV'

Cicero renders it (1.219): "Saepe etiam pertriste canit de pectore carmen et matutinis acredula vocibus instat, vocibus instat, et assiduas iacit ore querelas cum primum,gelidos rores Aurora remittit." Whether the creature concerned is an owl, or a thrush, or a frog, or a nightingale - or something different from any of these - one cannot help feeling tliat Cicero had suf­ fered from its ill-timed warnings. Before leaving Cicero's translations into verse, there is one other aspect of them which I think it is worth while to consider. This is his use of the dactylic hexa­ meter. Since he uses that metre for his translations from Homer and Aratus^it may be said with truth that it was largely through his translations that he contributed to the development of the Latin hexameter. This is an im­ portant result of his efforts as a translator. 6 8

CHAPTER VI.

Cicero's use of the dactylic hexameter.

In using the dactylic hexameter for his translations from Homer and Aratus Cicero is, of course, following his original. Though this metre v/as old to Aratus it was com­ paratively new to Cicero, for it had been little used in Latin literature. Ennius had introduced it into Latin literature rather more than a hundred years before Cicero used it. Since Cicero translated the "Phenomena" in early man­ hood this translation is probably our earliest example of his hexameter verse. His handling of it shows far greater variety than Aratus* metre, which is composed almost en­ tirely of dactyls in the first five feet. But Cicero would, cf course, have been familiar v/ith the Homeric hexameter from childhood; probably long before he became acquainted v/ith Aratus. He must also have been familiar with Ennius; and it is interesting to compare his hexameters with those of the older Latin poet. They show a greater variety of rhythm and have more beauty. At times Cicero's verse is almost equal to Virgil's. This suggests that he may have had/ 69.

had a considerable influence on the development of the Latin hexameter and have helped to pave the way for Virgil. It is difficult to compare Cicero closely v/ith Ennius as regards metre because so few of the extant fragments of Ennius* "Annales" consist of more than two or three lines. Moreover, the three longest fragments (each containing less than twenty lines) deal with totally different subjects from Cicero's "Phenomena." But the following characteristics of Ennius' verse may be noted (1) The end of a clause usually coincides with the end of a line; and there is seldom a full stop or any other long pause in the middle of a verse. It follows that many verses end with a verb. (2) The word and the foot often coincide, and diaeresis is commoner than caesura, e.g."sparsis hastis longis campus splendet et horret." (3) Archaic forms are common and "s" is often elided. (4) The last word of a verse is often polysyllabic. (6 ) Con­ secutive lines having the same rhythm are not uncommon. This makes the verse sound monotonous. Cicero shares with Ennius the first of these charac­ teristics - the simultaneous ending of clause and line. He also resembles him in having one favourite rhythm; but it is different from Ennius'. Ennius commonly puts,a trisyllabic word at the end of the line e.g."libentef; but Cicero prefers a/ 70.

a dissyllabic, preceded by a trisyllabic word e.g. "ignea venis;" "lumina clarae;" "nubibus atris." This means that the accent of the word coincides with the ictus of the verse and the rhythm of the line is emphasized in consequence. Cicero rarely uses a polysyllabic ending and isolation of the foot (i.e. word and foot coinciding) is not so charac­ teristic of his verse. It is perhaps chiefly owing to this lack of diaeresis in the first four feet^and coincidence of word accent with verse ictus in the last two feet^that Cicero's verse sounds so much more like Virgil's than like Ennius'. Cicero follows Ennius in using archaic words and in eliding "s"-but both usages are comparatively rare in his verse. Let us consider these characteristics in a little more detail. With regard to the simultaneous ending of clause and line, it must be remembered that Aratus himself seldom allows one clause to run on into the next verse. If, as is sometimes suggested, (by Clavel, for example,) the object in v/riting a didactic poem describing the names and positions of the stars was to help men to commit them to memory, it is possible that Aratus deliberately aimed at making the ends of phrases and sentences coincide with the end of the verse. In that case Cicero might be defended on the grounds that he is reproducing an important characteristic of his original. But it is probabl^t that he composed his verses in this way, not/ 71.

not so much from choice as from inability to handle the metre more freely. For his own original poems shov^the same characteristic. But occasionally he succeeds in writing a passage in which no such rigidity is found; for exampleJ the description of Orion's death ( "Phenomena "667. ) Here we have poetry which might have been written by Virgil himself. Nor is it sur­ prising to find Cicero's best verses among his translations if we accept Paguet's theory concerning this question. He maintains that Cicero's finest poetry is to be found in his translations because in them he is not striving to portray new subjects and ideas of his own, and is therefore able to give all his thought to the versification, and to ex­ pressing in poetry material supplied by others. But apart from a few "purple patches" in the "Phenomena" Cicero is nearer to Ennius than to Virgil in his arrangement of sentences in relation to the verses. The practice of placing at t he end of the line the main verb, or a participle closing a phrase, clearly tends to make the versification monotonous if it is employed frequently, and involves rigidity in construction. Ennius seems to have found difficulty in avoiding it. In one passage of seventeen lines no less.than eight end with a finite verb. Virgil, however, seldom has a verb at the end of the line. In a hundred lines/ 72.

lines of "Georgies III" (1. 19-63, 336-359, 475-505) only ten close with a verb or participle. Cicero comes between Ennius and Virgil* In a hundred lines of the "Phenomena" (1. 235-277, 357-389, 660-683,) thirty-four lines close with a finite verb or participle. This shows that his use of the hexameter is freer than Ennius' but not so free as Virgil's. (It may be noted that in his original poems in one passage of forty lines fifteen have verbs at theeoid.) This is in accordance with the viev; that his original poems are inferior to his translations in versification as well as in other ways. As regards those pauses in the sense which come not at the end, but in the middle, of the line (the distribution of which can give so much variety to the rhythm of the verse,) Cicero shows a definite advance in technique. Few of Ennius' sentences (so far as one can judge from extant passages) ended in the middle of a line*, and there are not many instances of other prolonged pauses in sense which do not coincide with the end of the verse. Cicero has more of such pauses than Ennius h u t not nearly so many as Virgil. In the hun­ dred lines of Cicero given above there are twenty pauses

i within the line, usually after the first foot or in the middle of the third. In none of these lines is there more than one pause. But in the hundred lines from the "Georgies III" given above there are forty pauses, most commonly after the/ 73.

the fourth foot (eleven times.) In three lines the pause comes after the fifth foot ^where Cicero had, none. Two pauses in the same line occur five times. The elision of a final "s" is a striking characteristic c f Ennius* verse e.g. "suavis homo, facundu* suo contentu* beatus scLtu* secunda loquens in tempore coramodu* verbum". Cicero only elides an "s" occasionally, and in later life he described such elision as "subrusticum." But his use of it in the "Phenomena" is a strong link v/ith Ennius^ and marks his verse as coming between that of Ennius and Virgil. Examples are "torvu* draco" (1.47) "Orioni* iacet"(1.365); "lapsu* repente" (1.259). Another indication of development in the hexameter is the gradual disappearance of the polysyllabic ending. The somewhat heavy character of Ennius* verse appears in his fondness for closing the line with a word containing four, or even five syllables. In a hundred lines of Ennius* hexameters I have found tliirteen with this ending e.g. (1.57) "Omnibus cura viris uter esset induperator." and again (1.72) "Qualem te patriae custodem di genueruntl 0 pater, 0 genitor, 0 sanguen dispriuiijfduml" Some of these lines are intentionally slow and heavy to suit their subject, e.g. (1/65). "Maerentes flentes lacrimantes commiserantes" and/ 74.

and again ( 7.9)^ "Denique vi magna quadrupes eques atque \ elephanti Projiciunt se...... " If the shades of the Latin poets had ever been called upon to weigh their verses one against another, Virgil himself might well have dreaded to meet Ennius 1 But in a hundred lines of Cicero's "Phaenomena" I have found only three ending with a word of four or five syllables, all of them Greek proper names; v/hile in a hundred lines of Virgil ( "Aeneid XIl"441...) there is only one line ending with a word of four syllables^wiiich is also a Greek proper name. In a hundred lines of "Georgies III" two such lines occur ^ending with "elephanto" and "hymenaeos" respectively; both Greek . Though he practically discarded polysyllabic endings Cicero's verse is heavier than Virgil's. A comparison of the same passages from Cicero and Virgil (Cic; Phen: 235-277; 357-389; 660-683: Virg: Georg. Ill: 19-63; 336-359;475-505) shows that Cicero employs fewer dactyls than Virgil. In these hundred lines Cicero has a hundred and fifty-two dac­ tyls in the first four feet of the verse, and Virgil a hun­ dred and seventy-five. (But Cicero seldom uses the spondaic ending which was so much affected by the Alexandrine poets and some of their Roman imitators.) Virgil more often than Cicero has a dactyl in the first and fourth feet. He has a _ dactyl in the first foot sixty times and Cicero forty-nine times./ 7 5 .

times. He has a dactyl in the fourth foot thirty-two times and Cicero only twenty. (In the second and third feet the proportion of dactyls is almost the same in both poets.) Cicero's preference for the heavier measure (whether conscious or not) is also illustrated by the fact that in these hundred lines fifteen contain five spondees, whereas Virgil has only ten. Ennius has six of such lines in forty- three lines. It has already been said that the rhythm of the closing words of the line is much less varied in Ennius' verse than in Virgil's. In a hundred lines of Ennius fifty close with a word of three syllables, and in one of the longer fragments six consecutive lines have this ending. But in a hundred lines of Virgil ("Georgies III") there are only twenty-seven such verses. It is not a favourite ending of Cicero's either. In a hundred lines of the "Phaenomena" there are only nine­ teen which have it. Cicero, however, is nearer to Ennius than to Virgil in that he does have one rhythm at the close of his verse which is commoner than any other. His favourite ending is a dis­ syllabic word preceded by a trissyllabic word. It occurs in forty-six lines out of a hundred which were examined. It is clear, therefore, that Cicero rnd Ennius both have far less variety in the rhythm of their verses than Virgil/ 76.

Virgil and that Cicero's verse is still somewhat rigid in construction and heavy in sound. But in his poetry the hexameter is becoming smoother and lighter and more rhythmical. 77

CHAPTER VII.

Cicero's Translation from Plato's "Timaeus".

Of Cicero's translations into prose by far the longest fragments are three passages from Plato's "Timaeus". They are all that remains of Cicero's "de Universe", which was, presumably, a translation of the whole dialogue. Cicero was the first Roman to make philosophical writing a branch of Latin literature and he was himself the greatest of Roman philosophical writers. He had few, if any philo­ sophic ideas of his own, and based all his writings on Greek philosophy; usually with acknov/ledgments to his masters. ^ In a passage of the "de Finibus" he explains that he considers it his duty to give his countrymen access to these great thinkers through Latih literature (de Fin: I § 10) "Ego vero, quoniam forensibus operis, laboribus^ periculis non deservlsse mihl vide or prae­ sidium in quo a populo Romano locatus sum, debeo profecto quantumcumquex^ possturi, in eo quoque elaborare ut sint opera, studio, labore meo doctiores Gives mei...-...et eis servire qui vel utrisque littoris (i.e. Graecis et Latinis) uti velint vel, si suas habent, illas non magno opera desiderent." Of all the Greek philosophers, Plato v/as his favourite/ 78

favourite and his writings abound in admiration and gratitude inspired by him. No greater proof of Cicero's interest in Platonic philosophy can be found than the fact that he translated this most difficult dialogue, the "Timaeus". His own writings are lull of Platonic doctrines, but mostly of such as deal with ethics rather than metaphysics. But here we find him carefully, and for the most part accurately, translating some of Plato's most complicated metaphysics. The passages extant are translations of 27D - 47B (omitting 37C - 38C and 43B - 45B). His translation is^on the whole^ extraordinarily accurate, though the difficulty of much of the subject matter and the difference between the two languages make a literal rendering impossible. Take for example the following sentence, where the Greek participles, ad­ jectives, adverbial phrase and cognate words must all, be rendered differently in Latin. (30A) ûoC, 7/oCyToC^ wya d) V ^

K o L T U . ' ^ J y I V ooTco TfoLyT àCTùv' O^tCTôv' \e(/3w y oo^ X X dC K i 1 Xw^ Koti iCxJ./<'rcoS, Sf & '^'yAyLv lAC T'ijs 'hy/^

"Nam cum constituisset deus bonis omnibus explore mundum, mali nihil admiscene, quoad naturel pa ter etur, quicquid erat quod in cernendi sensum caderet id sibi adsumpsit, non tranquilium et quietum,sed immoderate agitatum et f lui tans, idque ex/ 79

ex Inordinate in ordinem adduxit: hoc enim iudicabat esse praestantuis". Cicero tends to use shorter sentences than Plato and more direct language. His aim is always to put the argument as clearly and briefly as possible. Compare his translation of the following passage (29D):-

cî^' S i ’ y , o iuvie'TÙ.S \uvia-rijirî.y ■ Ayuûos olyolôçj ûî. Tî^P' olsvvh o^SirroTL k.yy',yyvr.^i ^&ovcs- Toi^-r6u Z’ik t'os ^y TTÛyrj. oT, yu^AKTxd^ y i^ ria -ô ^ i t/3ouA^8y oLv 1^0$ Tjj V ii

^yoL St oLSt^s> ouStTTôTt t^yy ly vtTcLf

\r Ô ^ is entirely absent from

"probus/ 8 0

"probus autem invidet nerainl"; / ^ / A the personal note in y^vL

is lost; and there is no appeal to the judgment of 'oT ’ Nor is there any reservation corres- ponding to oT/ yt \ . This passa^;e illustrates in an extreme form the general tendency of Cicero's translation of the dialogue. Considering the difficulty of the subjects treated Cicero is surely justified in his determination to make the main points of every argument and description as easy to grasp as he can and to regard all else as of secondary impor­ tance* We may not always agree with his interpretation of the Greek, but he never uses ambiguous language and seldom leaves us in doubt as to how he understands his original. Sometimes Cicero omits a small point if he thinks that it confuses the main line of argument. In § 29B Plato argues that the possibility of attaining truth in a discourse must depend on the subject under discussion and that words must necessarily be like their subject - Scoyo f (TT^c) V -rcTb ouv ytd Koi^i Koc!^ ^ trrd L Vou ktiLToLC^xfL-vtTus (To Koyou^) / ^ycfLToCTTTwTOu^ 0 ’ ù(Tôv^ Tt. oC \

X o y o /S , KoLi oLKtvifTù/Ç^ TOuToU S t r (ftiv ^ 7 V V • > V y_ “1 ~ 0 U S S i ' T ~ S o ‘Cp<5S y< S-V O C< If a / Û V /

S c cLx^eL Koyôv' Ti- 8 1

Cicero translates (C,o*§8 ):- "Itaque, cum de re stabile et Imcutabllè disputât, oratio tails sit quails ilia quae neque redargui neque convinci potest. Cum mtem Ingressa est imitate et offlete simulacre, bene agi putat si similituuinem verl oonsequatur. ' Plato, in his desire for absolute accuracy, adds the qualification

ùC-ùV Ti d^yrt-K^yKTô fs \oyots \ -> f ' * llVçf./ K OL f K\yf ^ I O ,

Cicero omits it, thereby simplifying a somewhat com­ plicated passage and leaving the essential points un­ obscured. So too in that passage intentionally com­ plicated, where Plato expresses the difficulty of following the moveiimnts of the heavenly bodies and of X . / c/ cr knowing KocToC X patro oo

K cLT<^ K c L \^ ri Tû\r~raL / TTocAii/ / q 'cfh o u s «oc) TÜ,/ Tol^ o l c^uAcidly.. ^5 Ao y ?ry<7row(r/ - - - 7 4 o c J

Cicero omits to translate T w y roC^Tot and says only (C.lO.g 57):- "quibusque temperibus a nostro aspectu oblitescant rursusque emersi torrorem incutiant rationis expertibus..."

No doubt he felt that it added little to

protracted unnecessarily a sentence already sufficiently long and involved. Occasionally Cicero allows himself to write a some#- what clumsy sentence in order to make his interpretation of the Greek perfectly clear. This is unusual. Gener­ ally his interpretation - whether right or wrong - is beautifully expressed and shows no evidence of being a translation. But in this passage (0.8.27) he writes;- "Et corpus quidem caeli aspectablie effeeturn est^ animus autem oculorum effugit optutum. Est autem unus ex omnibus, rationis concen- tionisque, quae Graece, sempiternarum rerum et sub intellegentiam cadentufm compos et p::rticeps; quo nihil ab optimo et prae- stantissimo genitore melius proereaturn...." The Greek is (36E):- ,

5 ’i.’ y^{.rLj^ào

u TTo T cTkj V- Td L, / u ia

. / y 6 \r,

Cicero construes the genitives

T w V Y o y ^ T ^ V d L/ TX ÙY t lôY

in apposition to c / Y I Cyl* 6 *^ t Ù lAf

and is anxious to make this clear. (Modern editors con- 8true them with uTTo To w oCpicrwhich seems more probably right, as they are then balanced byTtJv y .

Besides/ 83

Besides the necessity cf making this point plain, Cicero had another difficulty to contend with - that C I of finding an adequate translation for oy Having rendered it by a rare v/ord 'e-omen^i-e (possibly one which he invented for the occasion) he felt bound to justify it by adding the Greek word which it was in­ tended to represent. A modern translator would have given the Greek in a footnote. Cicero had to incor­ porate all his comi ents in the text. Having, therefore, made these two points clear, he does not trouble about the elegance of the sentence, nor does he attempt to ' y f > / reproduce the effect of (kptcrTou^ (although sometimes he does reproduce verbal assonances; for ex- ■> / > r ample in C.3.§ 8 quoted above ^(KovàLt^ K or< ^s is rendered 'simulacra....similitudinem.) The passage just discussed is not the only one in which Cicero introduces the Greek word which he is trans lating and comments upon it. In chapter 4 § 13 he says : "Omnia autem duo ad cohaerendum tertium aliquid requirunt. Sed vinculorum id est ofptissiraum at que pulcherrimuin quod ex se at que de iis quae strlngit quam maxime unum efficit. ^Id optime adsequitur, quae Graece \oy Latine (audendum est enim, quoniam haec primum a nobis novantur ) comparatio pro port love d i d potest." Again, (in chapter 6 § 17) speaking of the shape of the universe he says:- "globosum / B4

"globosum- eat 1‘abricatus quod <7-'c^oc/yoa i./ Cîraeci vooant, cuius omnis oxtremltus paribus a rsodlo r # d l l 8 attlngltur, Idque Ita tornavit ut nihil efflcl posset ro- tundols, nihil asperitatls ut haberot, nihil orfonsionis, nihil Inolsum angulis, nihil anfractibus, nihil erinens, nihil lacunosum#.

All that Plato says la (33B)j- > , i ' l i e Kct) ToCS TS-Aî-o T

The objeoticm is to the plural form. He ha# previously translated (32b) \ f \ ^ ^ n / O ç' l - d C S y - < ^ V Ou^t/fOfL^ C3C/0

/s.; yuci.

In one passage he adds the Greek a word which he has already translated many times, in order to show that here there is a reference to the use of the word to mean adornment, an allusion which cannot be shov/n in translation. Again ^when he finds it impossible to get an exact equivalent for the Greek word says (C.ll.g 38) "quos Graeci appellant, nostri, ut opinor, Lares^si modo hoc recte con- versum videri potest." His hesitation seems justified when one reads, later, that these Lares include Jupiter and Juno and their kindred. Sometimes Cicero adds a few words of his own to make Plato's meaning clearer. These slight additions may also be regarded as explanations which would be put in the form of footnotes in a modern translation. So, when Plato concludes his description of the creation of the planets with the words (39D)

K cLT

/ w v o C O ^ T j b cJV OCTol < J f O W II t u Ô y u S dl - Cicero translates (C.9.§ 34):- "Has igitur ob causas nata astra sunt quae per caelum penetrantia solstitiali se et brumali revocatione converterent". Similarly (in C.2.S 5 ) he translates the Greek (28B) 86

^ ' 01 '> ' <^ > \ / K t /i I t Û V o Okj ^ y oL 1/^ y ^ v i

I ^yro s o<,^ Ç o ( , ^ t 5 by :- "consideremus semperne fuerit nullo gener- atus ortu an ortus sit ab aliquo temporis principatu".(C.2.g 5 )

Occasionally Cicero's painstaking efforts to make an obscure phrase or involved sentence easier to under­ stand betrays a misinterpretation of the Greek. Ylhere Plato says of the Creator addressing the newly created souls (41E) ^ ^ , sTtTIV otuTû^/S Si I ^ cLufxf.^ i/s

T*L TTpocnJ vToC CC ^ %KcL(TT c(^ ù^ycLV^

C^Zvc^t t o ' ------t l xL. OpVoL^oC J^pàyrou ai^e surely the planets. But Cicero translates (C.12.§ 43):- "ostendit...satis autem et qiasi sparsis animis fore ut certis temporum intervallis oriretur animal.."

>/ y f (The phrase o^ydiyfcL J[^^you occurs again in 42D, where he translates it with studied accuracy (013):- "reliquas mundi partes quae sunt ad spatiorum temporis significationem notae constitutae".) So too, v/hen Cicero re-casts the long sentence beginning

(42B) J Tov TTpov''^ ^ o / oc he gives a slightly different meaning from the Greek. Platoy 87

Plato says that the erring soul must first begin to follow the revolution of the same that is within him and will thereby subdue his passions to reason. After that he will succeed in reaching his first state

TTp^ri^av Kcl\ TTCp f O S'cy (TuVLTT f Kf> 'T ^ (T^ i

^ 7^0' T Îj ^ w Ti^ t hi o ( I O t/ S o ^

But Cicero's translation implies that he will only begin to follow the revolution of same after he has subdued his passions and reached his first state. (C.12.§45):- "neque terminum malorum prius aspiciet quam illam sequi coeperit conversionem quam habebat in se ipse eiusdem et similis innatam et insitam. Quod turn eveniet cum ilia quae rationis expertia insederint denique rations depulerit et ad primam atque optimam affec- tionem animi p^rvetiarit. " It may be noted here that there are several passages where Cicero seems to have been conscious of his lia­ bility to misinterpret^^for he omits a whole phrase, pre­ sumably because he was uncertain of its meaning. Such passages are 33A where Plato says that the Creator used up all the four elements in making the universe and left nothing over ^reflecting that

TrSvè* d(TeL TTSyO f f(T T i y d K td l 7Tp> ôir'îTtTTTov'TeL oc t-u ^ /\u £./>--

Cicero leaves oi untranslated. So too, in section 36D/ 88

36D where Plato describes the division of the circle of Other into seven circles, Cicero omits

OuCTujV t-KoCrLiou)V rp/ccJv'^ «k Sk \oyW ^

In 4GB Plato says that each star was given only two movements and was bereft of the other five fV^ H-n >s I crrc(. ocù T w v dKtkcrTàY y

Cicero omitsthe final clause. There is one curious omission which it seems hard to explain. In describing the destiny of the soul which has lived a good life Plato says (42B):-

K cl] Ù s-u ToV 7rpd

. rrclA.y r r . y u & u \ o h,<.,v

die'ypou^

Cicero (C.12.45) gives only :- "atque ille qui recte atque honeste curri­ culum vivendi a natura datum confecerit ad illud astrum quocum aptus fuerit revertetur". At this point he loses interest in the good soul's fate. As regards language, Cicero is consistent in his use of special terms. Plato has three words for the universe

/ > / V ri ^ Kù

! j / 7Ta/T<<) and he says at the beginning of the dis­ cussion (28B)

I)- 89

o' rracj ou^cLyros - '7 4'

S 7-/ TTOTS- û\r Oyu cL V os yU^KliTT^ di ÎL)(d/T-o^

To^o 6^ Y/*? V Lovoyi.d

To TToAwia and its variations by 'universum' or ' universitas ' (once, also, by 'haec' and once by 'omnia')» He translates v-^i/s by 'intelligentia'^and words akin to y f i s , by v/ords akin to ' intelligentia' Voyi~< becomes 'sub intelligentiam cadentia', or 'qui ratione ^ r» ' ^ ' intellegentur'; ou &\_v 1 dv becomes 'nihil inintelli- Hut') ' gens'; K.OCrot y cTct/ ^ becomes 'intelligi'. (There are only two exceptions, where yoI/s is rendered 'mens').

Similarly KoyoS is always translated by 'ratio' except where it means 'discourse' - when it becomes 'oratio'. Even in his translations of ' o 06 he has one common basis. He renders it 'is qui aliquod munus/ 90

munus efficero molltur', 'effector', 'effectrix', efficientes'. (The only exception is the translation 'artifexwhich occurs once.) is trans­ lated by 'efficere'. But just as Cicero uses one Latin v/ord for one Greek term where such consistency is essential, or at least helpful, he is careful to avoid rigid adherence to one translation where the same Greek word is used in slightly

/ . different senses. For Ku k A ôs Cicero uses 'orbis', ' cursus', 'rotundus ambitus', according to the exact sense; for he has 'motus*, 'motis', 'cursus' and 'orbis'; for TSyo# he has 'motu^' and 'conversio';and f o r d 'conversio', and, more commonly, ' circum- itus' or ' ambitus'. The consideration of Cicero's use of particular words brings us to what is perhaps the strongest characteristic of his translation of the dialogue. Careful as he is to make the arguments easy to follow and his own interpre­ tation of Plato's meaning perfectly clear, to use rigid translations of special words where this produces the greater accuracy, to vary his translation when the meaning of the Greek word varies; when none of these considerations applies^ he indulges a passion for pairs of synonyms^for the translation of one Greek word by two Latin ones. Examples are/ 91

are to be found in the passages already quoted, and others occur in nearly every paragraph. In translating Plato (42D) ^ c, Sid.ôs- f causamque' for cLYdty~ios • Similarly where Plato com­ pletes his genealogy of the gods with the words (41A);-

VdLy^rtS 0<7~0uS cL d t f\ o o i d-oiLoy

Cicero renders the sentence (C.ll.g 39):- "reliquos quos fratres agnatosque usurp^ri atque appellari videraus^.

Compare alsoOL his translation UX OLlXk» J. CL 1/ yjJLof (39D)\X jU X J f the V I words:-

S-ÇTT I S' O/L ou S*L y/^ •yjTTdV KoLTd VO^ ' /"yrouf T ù Y Ti-Xi-dl/

’l.%rîdLu'rô^/ ' 7T\^/0O/ t ^TOTI I ^ f ôTd^Yyi 7'r^ ^

Cicero says (C.9.g 33):- "ac tamen illud perspici et intellegi potest absolute perfeetoque numéro temporis abso- lutum annum perfectumque turn compleri cum.. • " He translates by 'nodum vinclumque', X ' b y / 92

Cpù-flTl V by 'concordl quasi amicitla et oarltate' #/\by 'con- sumptione et sonlo'; >ri/AW by 'veteri legi morique ' ;

c ^ u ^ \y r ^y 'figuras pocudum et fer arum'. Verbs and pfu'ticiplos are duplicated as we have seen. Other instances are 'confocit et p ragravit' for r r t ^ i ; > / 'porpol^rint et absolverent' for ♦ 'con focti et consumpti' for sometimes

C - f adjectives are given two Latin equivalents: c>/^c l t ô v ±q

> t _ translated by 'aspici et videri'; t b^r 'in- viduam atque sinplicem' ; rwyLccA.T6? 1/ by 'concretum atque corporeum'. This use of pairs of words is clearly not due to the impossibility of finding an exact equivalent in one Latin word, and it is noteworthy that when Cicoro professes to hesitate over the translation of a Greek word he does ^ f not render it by two Latin ones. He translates ù y t ol by 'concentio', crcpcA-^^<3 by 'globosum' , S d f y ^ ô Y î . s -> r by 'Lares' and X o y/<< by 'comptiratio proportiove' (not -que). In view of this tendency to use pairs of words it is perhaps worth noting that occasionally Cicero uses only one word to trai-slate two in his original* He translates

Tra^ôv ^ c C f (Tc4» ov ^«c.^cjcuv^ ‘^.iSas^by 'terrestre' and

KotX ^f>^ôorèt-Y KcLi s J p id tu by 'ratione vine turn ' ♦

In/ 93

In dealing v;ith metaphors and similes Cicero seldom hesitates to translate his original literally and without comments. Indeed he could hardly do otherwise having once undertaken a translation of tris dialogue* But he shows a definite tendency to treat the Creator and the created gods with less familiarity than Plato does, especially when speaking of them in their relation to mortals. So he writes (C.2.g 6 )

”atque ilium quidem quasi parentem huius universitatis invenire difficile^et cum iam inveneris, indicare in vulgus nefas". where Plato has;-

TS- ^ y o V K.OL/ S tfxk.yrT^$

Besides the apologetic "quasi the meaning and position of ’nefas* is stronger than clSuvx^ t ù V , and perhaps

* vulgus’ is more contemptuous than n^\f'roCs . And again, where Plato says that, after the Creator had sown the seed of mortal souls:-

’To'n vioiS,

Cicero translates "dis, ut ita dicam, iunioribus permisit". So too, where the Creator is made to say of these souls (41C):-

ôiTdV' ^ S -Y ^uTuiy VotT^>/5 vcyu* O V 7î^àKT'^

Cicero/ 94

Cicero renders It:- "in quibus qui tales creabuntur ut deorum immortalium quasi gentiles esse debeant". (0.11*0 41). Cicero’s hesitation in using ’gentiles’ is doubtless due, in part, to the fact that the word f connotes kinship more definitely than o/tw. He does not like to speak directly of the Creator as performing what seem to be undignified tasks. %ere Plato says without hesitation (39B):-

Cicero translates (C.9.§ 31):- "deus ipse solem quasi lumen accendit". It is not, therefore, surprising to find that he refuses 4 to translate literally (41D) K^) nû\^>r -in-,' -ràv rJL Ttd^vTûS Y'-'XV npo

He says discreetly (C.12.§ 42):- "deinde ad temperationem superiorem revertit..." In connection v/ith Cicero’s treatment of the gods it is noteworthy that he translates by ’Lares’ and gives the Roman theogony in place of the Greek. That is, he gives the Greek gods and goddesses their corres­ ponding/ 96

corresponding Latin names and where Plato gives the children of Ocean and Tethys as : -

(pO/3 o ^ T L H^ol) ^ AicC/ o(To/ T ô u7oov

(40E) Cicero gives only Saturn and Ops (C.ll.g 39). Returning to the discussion of similes it may be noted that Cicero will not accept the literal use of yoj^d^oi in the creation of the human body. Plato says that in order to make human beings the gods took the irarnortal seed and portions of the four elements and -T-dlr-Oir T / o'uv iato

To''is oîs oLir-û/' < y ~ y , v ^ i '^o v t o iXU .S'/ TTUK....

yo /^(p o t^ ^^ y (43A) which Cicero renders (0.13.0 47):- "easque (partlculas) inter sa copulabanl^ haud isdam vinculis quibus ipsi erant colligati^sed talibus quae cerni non possent propter parvitatem^crebris quasi cuneolis inliquef actis...... quasi....." Similarly we find that while in this passage he does not hesitate to use ’particulae* for the portions of earth, air, fire and water (as a translation of ) when /4a/» f oL these^are living creatures he says ’quasi particula quaedam’. The Greek is (300) ct tcTTf TtL W

"cuius/ 96

"cuius ergo orane animal quasi particula ^.uaedam est." He has an interesting translation of the Greek

0 (ùY ^ . Plato says, in describing the process where­ by the universe was created ; - (3 ^ ^^

ToLo7~'hV ooV' T'^iV (Pc/

d\k- ! ^ k ^ , S may w y ------

366-) Cicero translates (C.7;§ 24):- "Hanc igitur omnem coniunctionem duplicem in longitudinem diffidit mediaeque accomodans mediam quasi decussavit". The verb ’decussare’ is derived from ’decussis* meaning the number ten. Possibly the verb is invented by Cicero

- cf ’globosus’ for ( r c ^ d n - but at all events he has changed the Greek simile into one which will be fam­ iliar to his Roman readers. Has Cicero succeeded in presenting this great dia­ logue to readers of his translation? I think v;e may say without hesitation that he has - so far as the subject is concerned. He does, as a rule, present Plato’s meaning clearly, accurately and eloquently. It is not hard to understand such omissions and elaborations as occur in his translation. They are the result of thoughtfulness, not of carelessness. But v/hile he shows his readers what Plato/ 97

Plato said he does not show them how he said it. The style is his own; and his writing is less bold; less human, less crowded with detail than Plato’s - in a Î v/ord, less vivid. 98

CHAPTER VIII.

Cicero’s Prose Translations (other than the "Tirnaeus".)

Cicero translated many passages from Plato in addi­ tion to the "Timaeus". He translated the whole of the "Protagoras", though only four short fragments of his translation remain* Other passages from Plato occur in his philosophical works and were apparently translated

only for the purpose of illustration. There is no reason to suppose that they ar*e extracts from a translation of the whole dialogue. To these must be added ma' y short passages translated from Aristotle, Epicurus and the Stoic philosophers, and a translation of Xenophon’s "Oeconomicus", parts of which are still extant; besides

several passages from other parts of Xenophon’s writings. The short passages translated from Plato show more clearly than the "de Universe" how often Cicero aims at translating the important points in the argument and either omits unessential details or generalises Plato’s particulars. The result is that where in Plato we get

a life-like painting of scenes and characters and events Cicero gives only a colourless sketch. Take for’example the/ 99

the incident in the "de Senectute" (C.11,111) where Cato tells Laelius and Scipio that it is character, and not senile decay, which makes old age grievous to some men. This passage, though not openly ascribed to Plato (Re­ public A32 § D) is too close to it to escape criticism as a translation. Cicero gives the essential points of the argument though he omits much of the detail. Where Socrates asks about the path of old age (1.328)

iTùiu Tf^ Kol)

>/

Laelius says only "volumus...istuc quo pervenisti videra quale sit". Cato gives no details of youthful pleasures

TTC/O/' 7~1 o

omit or generalise t!ie details which make Plate’s portraysl of e subject so vivid and ir grcsaive. There is another passage from the Republic - in many respects well rendered « wWre Cicero seems to hesitate between fidelity to hie original and hie own inclination to o:-it unessential detail. 'Ihis is t M story of Oyges and the magic ring. Cicero's version (de Off: III C.9) gives a stdlft, vigorous narrative, yet lacking in much of the detail which Plato supplies. It is not es ential to know (idiat Plato tells us) that Oyges was s shepherd who tended the flocks of a king of Lydia, ïsor that^when he rejoined his com aniens after obtaining the ring, he found theas gathered together to discuss tfieir monthly report to the king on the state of his flooloi; or even that C^ges «ont to the palace by getting hlciself chosen to take the report to the king. He v/as scarcely in need of suWi an excuse. Hevwtheless, theoo details give reality end plausibility to the fairy tale. Cicero ignores some of them: a W introduces otliers in askwai'd places ; being t o m between faithful translatiez and onission of unnecessary sdditions. He begir» the story in outline

*H1ik! ills Gyges induoitur a Pietone, qui, cum terra disoessisset...." Plato/ loi.

Plato begins (359d)

B ^ t ^ u û YT<^

'7TeC(0oc' r/ri /\xjSicL^ i^^ojl^OYTf^

After describing how Gyges got possession of the ring Cicero says:- "quern ut detraxit ipse induit (erat autem pastor); turn in concilium se pastorum recepit". And, after describing how Gyges discovered the ring’s magic power, he continues "itaque hac opportunitate annuli usus, reginae stuprum iritulit, eaque adiutrice regem dominum inter emit; sustulit quos obstare arbitrabatur; nec in his eum facinoribus quisquam potuit videre. Sic repente annuli bénéficie rex exortus est Lydiae". The disjointed character of the narrative is obvious. The parenthesis "erat autem regius pastor" coming in the middle of the action, is extremely awkward; and the last sentence is qiite out of place - forming an anticlimax. Both would have been better omitted. For, as Cicero tells the story, the fact that Gyges was the king’s shepherd is pointless, since Gyges is not sent to the palace by the shepherds as their representative. But Cicero apparently begins the story as a mere illustration intending to give only the outline; and then, feeling that/ 102

that he is departing too far from his original, drags in certain points in Plato’s narrative which he had previously omitted. As a result his story is far less skilfully told than Plato’s. But it should be noted, in justice to Cicero, that there is one short story translated by him where he is more successful. It comes from Xenophon (Oec; IV 20) and is an anecdote about Lysander the Spartan visiting the gardens of Cyrus^where the prince was wont to labour witli his own hands. Cicero tells it well and renders it accurately though freely. Returning for a moment to Cicero’s translations from Plato^we find an interesting passage from the Re-, public (IX 571 B)^ highly characteristic of Plato in thought and language, and it is worth noticing how Cicero deals with it (de Div: I 29). Plato is describing the. havoc wrought in a man’s soul when he is asleep by evil dreams arising from his intemperate, revels before re­ tiring to rest. He contrasts them v/ith the inspiring visions of the temperate man v/ho has feasted his soul on intellectual food. The three parts of the soul are each endowed with life and personality and their activi­ ties are described with great dramatic power. The passage would 103

would test the resources of any translator into any language* That Cicero has succeeded in giving so spirited and eloquent a rendering is ga?oof of his ability, while his version reveals his chief o/iaracter- istics as a translator* His pereonification of the three parts of soul is not so vivid as Plato’s* Cicero does not speak of them as taxied or soothed, like animals* Yûiere Plato says of Tb' wfls that it is:-

T i- Koc) c^lcrj(uV>^^ K.« t 6

Cicero has only;- "a men ta at ratione vacua"

^7 ro' fi^ K T x rT ^ yy f \yj ÎT Û Y

is rendered by "praeatringoro aciem mentis solet"* Though maintaining the sequence of ideas^Cicero leaves out some phrases where he finds that Plato’s abundance of words is becoming unwieldly in Latin* He omits V _ a x x ’ ^Z-ro Koce'

tij.) op'iyi-crùyL/ TO>J I ^ ^ T/ r ü v ^ o V r o y ^ K cl\ y^lXXc^rw,.;

Which/ 104

which is not absolutely essential as It is only an expansion of the preceding sentences- oTT

on r'fJLS T C T o t ô u T i^ /^d^kt

Cicero uses pairs of words to translate one Oreek ivord-’ qui aalubrl et moderato cul tu atque victu^(uy( /cui

Ti<, oLuTOS et «Toi» XcCi (Tw(^paT psrt« anlisl^quae mentis et consilli cat,agitata et w e e ta* V \ \ ^ / (for n o \oyKTi I K ùYyM.s-v $_yL//oou) - ’ilia etlam tertia parte animi sod^^ta atque restincta (for / TTpdLüV^otS ) ïn oue place Cicero substitutes for Plato’s iietaphor a metaphor of his own - his favoiirite metaphor of fire and Mg)it* Plato says:- Ss _ _ _ . icru y ûC(Tc3CS t w So o

>___ _ r __ - _ - cKYdLt(CL\J'yj f cC f which Cicero rendero:- "ilia etian tertia parte antmi ^in qim irarum exstitit erdor^ sedate atque re- stinote, turn evenlet#.#.ut Ilia tertiu m r s rationis et nantis eluceat". His use of ’tortie pars’ twice in the serm sentence for two different i^erts of t e soul is not elegant though the meaning is clear* He shows a siiBilor lack of ro- soiurcefulness in using the phrase ’irem et ratio" three tinea ^ 105

times where Plato has:- f y f \ / To' \ o y I

i v W -ro' (^fOdY^tY Sy y r'y )T£TcA./.

But the repetition ’ inunoderate tumefacta potu.... immoderatequo iactari’ is, of course, a deliberate translation of Plato’s

TFk'yjU-âiY oC7ro7T^?r\t#^v^rf-f oLv'f ^ 'V-

At the end of his translation Cicero has the inter­ esting r eiTiark : - "haec verba ipsa Platonis express1", Vvhether this implies that he is well satisfied with his rendering, or whether it is an apology for what appeared to him an extravagant allegory, I am not perfectly sure. In the other translations from Plato and Xenophon only one point seems to me of particular interest. ' This is Cicero’s method of treating certain common Greek v/ords and Greek ideas by correspondingly family Latin ones. Where Plato describes how the democratic city is apt to abuse its councillors unless they conform to its wishes he says (Republic § 562D)

Sy.^.aT«c^w.>, ^)(o yrru s - - .

Cicero translates (de Republica I 43) "inexplebiles populi fauces...magistratus et/ 100

"ot i^inclpes...tnsequitw, insteulat argult; i:w*G©fiCtor tes, reges, tyrannos vocat". Cicero’s feelings on this subject almost run away with him I In the same passage for the Greeks of yM.iv vLo / 7T^S-Cr^3oTY><5/^ oL/f ACoC/

S !id k y f f^k^YTcJif kcl) v/e find the more dignified and typically Roman renderings "adolescentes ut sonu^ sibi pondus assumant" Again, where Cicero ascribes certain patriotic tor^ts to the Stoics (do lin: III 19) the v/cædsî-

u T T t^ Tr.L Tja r S d KoC i UTTÎ^Ç» C f/ \ ^ V are rendered:- "pro re publics". His translations from the Epicurean and Stole #iil- osçfphers are illustrations of their beliefs^ and definitions of terms used by them, ^îost of Uiese ore very accurate and eloquent translations* Ho translates the Stoic de­ finition of:- _ i7r(0i^/oi T-ol’ SoKoCiyr , I / otJ If ^ or^i fcoY r by the words:- (Tuse: IV g 20) "ira...libido poeniendi eius qui vldeatur laesisse injuria" But/ 107

But he could not always find words to express the Greek so literally# In many of these translations h© had to coin new words# He says in one passage {Tus: IV § 2S)î- "similitorque ceteri rorbi, ut gloriae cupidités, ut imliorositas, ut its oppollem earn quae Oraece" dicitur" ^ ^ and in another (Tuso: IV g M ) 5- "huius igitur virtutis contraria est vitiositos (sic enim nalo quam mlitlof appellare ©am quam Grasci Kolk')e Latin tongue was en­ riched through his translations of i^losophloal terms# 108

CHAPTER IX.

Cicero as the Creator of a Philosophic Language.

Cicero was the first Roman to attempt philosophical writing^ and. In accordance v/lth the practice of his nation, W never aimed at originality, but set about translating the works of the Greek philosophers, or giving their Ideas In his own words and setting. Other branches of Roman literature had developed In the same way. Epic poetry had Its origin In Ennius’ translation of Homer; tragedy In translations of Sophocles and Euripides made by Ennius, Naevlus and Llvius; comedy In Plautus’ trans­ lations from Menander and other Greek comic poets. It was to Cicero that the Romans owed their first and great­ est philosophical writings.

This new branch of literature demanded, as Cicero saw, a new philosophical language. His own words about the relative richness of the Greek and Latin language are worth quoting. He maintains that Latin is no poorer than Greek and that both languages had to create philosophical terms. He says (de Fin: I § 10):- "sed Ita sentlo et saepe disserul Latlnara llnguara non modo non Inopem, ut vulgo putarenty 109

putarent, sed locupletloreon etiam esse quam Graecam. Quando enim nobis, vel dicam aut oratopibus bonis aut poetis, postea quidem quam fuit quern imitarentur ullus orationis vel copiosae vel elegantis omatus defuit?" But he makes it clear that it is through his own v/ritings that thio richness has been revealed and even created. The fact that he puts orators before poets in the pas­ sage just quoted is sufficient proof. Moreover, he says (de Nat: deorum I g 8 ): "complure8 enim Graecis institutionibus erudit& ea quae didicerant cum civibus suis communicare non poterant quod ilia qua© a Graecis accepls- sent Latine d i d posse diffiderent. Quo in genere tantum profecisse videmur ut a Graecis ne verborum quidem copia vlnceremur." But, though Cicero did undoubtedly create a new language of philosophy (as has been shown by the French scholar, Victor Clavel, In his dissertation ’de M. Tullll Ciceronls Graecorum Interpret©*), this does not mean that he invented a great number of hew words. He did Invent some words, as he himself confesses (e.g., ’proportlo’, ’medietatesO, but he was exceedingly cautious about coin­ ing words. Clavel (Part II, c. VII, p, 280, 289) ascribes this to the fact that his readers, the educated Romans of his day, would not have taken kindly to new words^ and thinks that Cicero was acutely conscious of this. Personally, I think that Cicero was Influenced more by his own sensibilities than by his readers.*^ It seems probable/ 110

probable that his own good taste made him shrink from creating a new, technical jargon. He finds It necessary to defend innovations In language, at some length. In the third book of the"de Pinlbus"{§ 3). He says: "Stolcoruin autem non Ignores quam sit subtile vel splnosum potlus disserendl genus Idque cum Graecis, turn magls nobis, quibus etlam verba parienda sunt Imponendaque nova rebus novis nomlna. . . . (§5) . • • Quod si In ea lingua quam p1er1que uberlorem putant concessum est ut doctlsslml homines de rebus non pervagatls Inusltatls verbis uterentur, quanto Id nobis magls est concedendum qui ea nunc prlmum audemus attlngere? Et, quonlam saepe dlxlraus. . . nos non modo non vlncl a Graecis verborum copia sed esse In ea etlam .superlores, elaborandum,. est ut hoc non In nos- trls solum art Ibus sed etlam In lllorum Ipsorum assequamur. " Cicero’s method of creating a philosophical language was to combine old words Into new phrases and to give a new meaning to familiar words. We may take as Illustra­ tions of such combinations of old words the expressions ’sub Intelllgentlam cadentla* and ’in cernendl sensum cadentla’ by which he translates the Platonic terms

\ Td vo'y^Td^ r and ’7^ o/oLTx f respectively. He renders

H ToL UYoLf T T T o iy T fK ^

"bonorum alia slnt ad lllud ultlmum pertinentla • • • alia autem efflclentla," (de Pin: III § 54) ' Tri(To(. k.w.7 ’ becomes 'actlones honestae.' Among/ Ill

Among the vast number of familiar words to which he gave a new, specialised meaning in the course of his philosophical writings, we may take as examples ’materia*, ’species’, ’scientia’, ’fides*, used to translate the ^ ^ ^ Ç) ^ ^ ^ Platonic terms ’ o u^ticl , f i ^£oc , ’ C7r,(TTo^^ and Trtcrr-f^ respectively, and ’corpuscula’ used for the ’ ^ n o y to i » of Democritus. In v/rlting on ethics he gives a special meaning to ’gaudlum’ and ’laetltla* when he uses them to translate

’ and ’ . The Greek Is ^uKoyos,

H S ^ oL\ûyos T^TTa^i^crts Cicero says (Tusc: IV § l3) : "Nam cum latlone animus movetur placide atque constanter, tum lllud gaudlum dlcltur . . . laetltla, gestions vel nlmia d i d potest." If we turn to the consideration of those words wlilch are not found in Latin literature before Cicero wrote his philosophical treatises, and which, it seems probable, were Invented by him, or, at any rate, made familiar, and Incorporated Into literary language:^ through his use of them, we find two types of words^^ especially common. The first consists of abstract nouns, e.g. ’colllgatlo’, ’unlversltas’, ’anlmatlo’, ’circumvectio *, ’commentatlo’ / (for ), ’aequlllbrltas ’. The second consists of adjectives with the termination -bills, e.g. ’indls- solubllls ’ ( oL A u ( ^ / ) ’comprehenslblle ( 7r , 0 / ) aspectablle/ 112

>/ aspectablle* ( ) ’aestlmablle’ ( , (Clavel gives these and other examples). There Is another way In which Cicero seems to me to have made a definite contribution to the creation of a philosophic language. I refer to his rigid use of one and the same term for one philosophical concept. I have commented on this In discussing his translation of the * ^ "Tlmaeus". Cicero always translates * k.O(Çmos. , by

’mundus*, and (with two exceptions) * voc*s x with its kindred words by ’intelllgentla’ and Its kindred words. That this consistency Is deliberate Is shown by the fact that where he Is not translating a strictly philosophical term he uses a different Latin equivalent. So, In ren- >/ dering "Republic" IX 571 B he translates ’ oivo/oc f by ?/ ’ temerltas *. Had ’ cLy o /cL occurred In the "Tliaaeus", I am convinced that Cicero would not have translated It by ’temerltas’ there. In the words of J. S. Phililmore: "Cicero taught Philosophy to speak Latin; and throu^ Latin she learned to express herself In the modem languages, . • . and so he spoke to no small purpose; for It Is largely owing to him that our minds are articulate." 113

CHAPTER X.

Conclusion.

In the preceding chapters I have attempted to de­ scribe Cicero’s translations and to discover what are his chief characteristics as a translator. We find, as I said at the beginning, that his method of translating varies according to his purpose. Some­ times he give the original in outline only, ignoring those details which gave to the Greek its special charm and character; but preserving the main thought or line of argument. Of this kind are many short passages from Homer and Plato. Sometimes his translation is extremely free, and alters the whole tone of the original. This is true of the two longer passages from Homer and much of Aratus » poem. These were not, originally, intended to be used as illustrations of a particular point and Cicero in­ dulged his own taste and imagination in turning them into Latin verse. Where he is not literal, he favours a rather more severe and logical presentation of his subject than the Greek/ 114

Greek writers, and v/here he amplifies his original, he does not add subtle descriptive touches, but obvious epithets and straight forv/ard explanations. In par­ ticular, we must note in his translation from Aratus* "Phenomena"the lavish addition of words connoting light, and in all his verse translations a tendency to trans­ late a vague word or phrase by a more precise one. In his prose translations v/e note especially the frequent translation m e Greek word by two Latin synonyms. But, in general, his translations keep close to their originals, and such omissions and additions as occur can be accounted for without difficulty. Broadly speaking, Cicero omits v/hat is irrelevant or superfluous^ if by so doing he can make the sense clearer, and adds explanations where he thinks that a Roman reader might not be able to follow the Greek writer’s meaning. His language is usually simple and nearly always eloquent. He coined few new words, either in pros© or verse translation; but by combining familiar words into new phrases, by giving a philosophical import to familiar words, by the consistent use of terms, and by careful definitions, he made Latin a vehicle for philosophical expositions. His use of the dactylic hexameter is lighter, smoother, and/ 115

and more varied than Ennius’, and may well have had con­ siderable influence in developing that metre which was perfected by Virgil. It must be clear to everyone that the art of trans­ lating is extremely difficult and demands for its exe­ cution a great master, if not a genius. #iat satisfies one person may not seem adequate to another, and it is always easier to criticise the faults of a translation than to appreciate its virtues. We ought, therefore, to exercise the utmost caution in criticising the trans­ lations of a great writer like Cicero. We must re- member that in turning Greek literature into Latin, Cicero was translating from a language which he wrote and spoke almost as fluently as his own into the language which was his native tongue, and in the use of which he was perhaps the greatest master who ever lived.